Monday, March 19, 2012

Innocent Until Proven Guilty

This very common, very familiar phrase, that one is "innocent until proven guilty", is spoken of these days only in books, not in action. Although for large cases in which the consequence is high, it is given much more attention; it is barely even a forethought for the every day judicial incident.

Let us call upon the phrase "your actions speak so loud, I can't even hear what you are saying" to help prove the point: It is easy to get a traffic ticket, but very difficult to prove your innocence once its written.  If you want to fight a parking ticket, good luck. They issue them out freely, knowing its cheaper for you to pay them than to miss a day of work and fight it in court. I am currently struggling with a case in which I did not include certain information regarding a past incident with the State of California due to a misunderstanding of what category it fell into. The State now, in all of its wisdom, has declared that I purposely withheld information, and now I must defend my integrity. What I find interesting is that they claimed dishonesty as opposed to misunderstanding, as if they were there, and they presume to know my intention. I bring this up because I am clearly not being treated as someone who is innocent, or being given the benefit of any doubt. I am being treated as if I am most certainly guilty, and they could care less about what really happened.

This attitude with our government is not new. I have witnessed multiple courtroom sessions in which the judge has clearly stated that if you simply say that you're guilty or plead no contest the minimum fine will be  given. But, if you fight it and you lose, the absolute maximum fine possible will be given. This does not sound at all that innocence is presumed, nor does it seem that they would even care to hear your explanation.  It sounds more like they are very busy, and lets face it - you are most likely guilty, and they would rather you not waste their time. Our judicial system is now mirroring a fast-food drive-thru, being that they can process your case and issue your sentence just as quickly as you can order, pay for, and drive off with a double-cheeseburger and chocolate shake.

Although we can appreciate their frustration with having such a heavy work load, and of course hearing every excuse known to man for every illegal act; it shows a very real disconnect with our basic constitutional rights. It also exposes a huge hole in the efficiency of our legal process. How on Earth to fix it is unknown, save waiting for the Lord to take his place as ruler of this world promised in Ephesians 1:10.

Until that happens, we must face a brutal fact:

We no longer have a justice system; we simply have a legal system.

No comments:

Post a Comment