Bells
Staff member
When I came across this article, I must admit I was a bit horrified.
That everyone should have their fair day in court goes without saying. At first glance of this article, I found it very disturbing that even lawyers participated in the beating of the two accused. How can such a thing happen in a court room? And then I thought about it.
What if it had been my child.. With that thought in mind, I found myself disturbingly agreeing with the 'mob'. Here we have a man from a rich and influencial family, who along with his servant, are accused of killing 21 children in horrific ways. Now being from an influencial family, I would imagine that the accused was shocked to discover that no lawyer would touch this case to defend him. This case appears to be especially henious.
As I try to wrangle in my own mind the fairness or due right of a defense that these two deserve when appearing, I find myself saying that I could never agree to defend such individuals. I would imagine they have found other lawyers to defend them. Already the influencial family are pointing the finger at the servant and I imagine this case will get worse as it proceeds through the Indian legal system.
But should the 'mob' rule? I am reminded of the case where an Iranian serial killer who's victims were young boys, was publically assaulted by the families of his victims before being hung in front of the gathering crowd and I remember how uncomfortable I was then too. I feel appalled at the act itself, but also understanding of how some people might want some closure and revenge (especially the families) after something so terrible.
Deep down in my rational mind, I hope that the mob does not rule, because the accused do deserve a fair trial. They have not yet been found guilty, and even the mountain of evidence against them should not have them tried and found guilty by public opinion. To be beaten in a remand hearing is, disgusting, but after what I imagine to be sensationalistic coverage by the local media, the mob did indeed wish to rule and did so.
That everyone should have their fair day in court goes without saying. At first glance of this article, I found it very disturbing that even lawyers participated in the beating of the two accused. How can such a thing happen in a court room? And then I thought about it.
What if it had been my child.. With that thought in mind, I found myself disturbingly agreeing with the 'mob'. Here we have a man from a rich and influencial family, who along with his servant, are accused of killing 21 children in horrific ways. Now being from an influencial family, I would imagine that the accused was shocked to discover that no lawyer would touch this case to defend him. This case appears to be especially henious.
As I try to wrangle in my own mind the fairness or due right of a defense that these two deserve when appearing, I find myself saying that I could never agree to defend such individuals. I would imagine they have found other lawyers to defend them. Already the influencial family are pointing the finger at the servant and I imagine this case will get worse as it proceeds through the Indian legal system.
But should the 'mob' rule? I am reminded of the case where an Iranian serial killer who's victims were young boys, was publically assaulted by the families of his victims before being hung in front of the gathering crowd and I remember how uncomfortable I was then too. I feel appalled at the act itself, but also understanding of how some people might want some closure and revenge (especially the families) after something so terrible.
Deep down in my rational mind, I hope that the mob does not rule, because the accused do deserve a fair trial. They have not yet been found guilty, and even the mountain of evidence against them should not have them tried and found guilty by public opinion. To be beaten in a remand hearing is, disgusting, but after what I imagine to be sensationalistic coverage by the local media, the mob did indeed wish to rule and did so.
