08 December 2010

Justice Is Blind

But we're going to hire a PROFESSIONAL makeup artist on the taxpayer dime to cover up the swastika on an accused murderer's neck.  (Article here.) We wouldn't want the jury to get all biased and all. 

I suppose justice is blind, but people in court are not.  That's why the scraggly kid who (legally necessary word to follow parenthesis) "allegedly" threatened my son with death, repeatedly trespassed on others' property after being warned to stay away, and defaced the sanctuary area of a CHURCH got a nice little haircut before his appearance before the juvi judge.  He looked like a little mini-businessman, is what he did.

Did it help his case?  I don't know.  There's no way to know these things.   Then again, the taxpayer didn't foot the bill for the kid's professional haircut.  Why should they for the makeup artist?

But... the other side has a good point, too.  You want a conviction for murder to STICK and not be overturned by anyone else because jurors were prejudiced against the accused and etc. etc.  So... whatever.  Best interest of true justice being served and all that.  If I were the victim's family, I would loathe it but dangit, do what you have to do to get this guy gone for good if he's the murderer.


No hating, but... isn't it true that black defendants get thrown into the slammer and/or convicted at a way higher rate than whites for the same crime?  Isn't it?  Wouldn't a defendant LOGICALLY be able to ask for a total makeover before each trial day so that he can APPEAR to be white?  Get the blue contacts out?  All that?  It seems a bit distasteful to me, but that would be the next logical step, wouldn't it? People would probably be willing to dress up in a bit of makeup to avoid the electric chair or major jail time.  And if every black defendant pulled that, it would be a major expense to the state if they had to honour those requests.  Then again, would YOU want to take a chance that you are sending some guy to the electric chair because a jury might be subconsciously biased?  Sometimes I think about things like that and truly wonder.  How fair are we, really?

And would too much makeup on a defendant make the trial null and void because witnesses wouldn't recognize him?  Wouldn't it stand to reason that hiding a large tattoo like the swastika in the article is hiding a major identifying characteristic that witnesses would need to make a positive identification?

How "fair" do we really have to be to these defendants before it gets a little ridiculous??  Do we need to play theme music as everyone enters the courtroom like they do on People's Court?


  1. Sigh. It would just be better to pick good jurors and have done with it. Nevermind the makeup, and why can't he wear a turtleneck under his prison gear during the trial? Save just under $200 per day by using a $6 shirt.

  2. Race is one thing. How you present yourself to the public is another. People have often said that we shouldn't judge people by the way they dress or do their hair. But the way they dress and how they do their hair--and what tattoos we get--is something we, for the most part, do on purpose.

    The difficulty in all this, of course, is that these little hints and jagged aspects of humanity are major parts of communication, for good and bad. If we did our trials via Texting or Instant Messaging, we'd have a harder time getting at the truth. But we would also not be biased by certain aspects of the person's physicality.

    Interesting topic.


  3. Good Grief!

    I can see both sides...but my primary objection to this plan is the fact that the state is paying for it. Any Appearance Modifications should come out of his own pocket.

    On the other hand, I tend to agree with the commentors of that article who said that the guy was proud enough of the opinions those symbols represent to TATTOO them on his FACE for the REST OF HIS LIFE, that he shouldn't hide them like a whiny baby now.

  4. Oh my. I like the way you think.

  5. Just when you think people cannot stoop any lower, well, they do.

    I agree, a turtleneck or better yet one of those charming 'dickey' shirts that Cousin Eddy sported in National Lampoons Christmas Vacation would do the trick.

    If he feels the need to cover and hide his choices her on earth, so be it. No amount of make up can hide true evil. But, I do feel that he should have to disclose to the jury that he is hiding/covering a tattoo. Just not say what it is or where. Human nature can be so much more creative and interesting that the truth....think of all the disturbing options that the jurors could imagine...

  6. What? I can't believe they would go out of their way to do that. He needs to be seen, in all his glory. Swastika and all. If I was a juror, you bet that would help me to realize what a creep he is.


Non-troll comments always welcome! :)