Freedoms and Rights

2.      “It is better to let 1000 guilty men go free than to allow one innocent man to be sent to prison”

a)  First of all the quote is, pretty stupid.  It’s probably an exaggeration, but who knows what the 1000 guilty men will do?  But the truth is, in this world right now, too many non-guilty people are getting arrested, and way too many guilty people get away with it.  That sets up two unfair deals, and sometimes it’s a big headache to the government. That movie where Hurricane got arrested for 20 years showed how careless the government was.  How could anyone think of an innocent man being imprisoned for 20 years? It’s not tolerated, anywhere. I personally think that if a violation of a suspected criminal’s right has occurred, it is NOT enough a justification to just dismiss all criminal charges.  Many policemen will do illegal searches, and of course the government has to put a halt to that, but once there actually is evidence that a person is guilty, he should be trialed right away.  If we don’t be flexible and just allow him to go because of a simple illegal search, more disaster will strike.  If the criminal knows that he can get away with this, why won’t he risk it again?  All it will do is increase the chance of him ruining the society once more.  Also it won’t do any good to the suspect himself.  If he’s innocent, that’s another story, but basically it’s like a parent giving the world to the child and not letting him realize that there’s a word called ‘wrong’.  The guilty man needs to know that it’s not a good thing to do whatever he did and he shouldn’t get away with his mistakes.  Sometimes that’s a big impact to the society. 

b)  

i) They won’t be happy with it.  They probably know that illegal searches are not to be done and if they are, any criminal charge should be dismissed.  He will definitely complain about the search, unless he knows nothing about the government.  The accused will realize what he did but nobody wants to go to prison so he will find somebody to talk to and explain what actually happened.  Most probably he will be let go, because a law is a law – but what should be done is the opposite of that.

ii) Ignoring the rights of the accused sounds pretty harsh but in my opinion it’s actually going to improve the overall justice system. It makes the society fair to everybody and whoever does something violating the law will suffer the consequences.  But of course, there shouldn’t be illegal searches in the first place, but if there’s big-time proof sitting right in front of you that someone is guilty, what’s the point of letting him go just because he wasn’t ‘searched’ properly? It doesn’t balance the justice system whatsoever.

c)

i) The accused will be extremely happy that they got away with one.  And sooner or later, he will be thinking of repeating the same crime because he knows the government has to protect his rights – and that accounts for big trouble in the near future, for him and the society.  

ii) The laws are more definite for the government, resulting in a stable society, but it’s not going to balance the overall justice system.  It’s letting guilty men go free and that’s not a small topic because it’s doing a favour for the accused, and if they actually did something bad, who knows what he’s going to do in the near future to really harm the society.  I think there needs to be an exception for right upholding, because that will do good to the government and the justice system to ensure safety for all citizens, instead of letting the wild dogs loose into any part of the world and risking rabies.