VLVL the collapse of justice

[Bandwraith at aol.com]

In a message dated 2/20/04 6:21:33 PM, jbor at bigpond.com writes:

<< Of course, Frenesi bears the burden of moral guilt for Weed's murder and 
the
collapse of PR3. >>

It's revealing that some consider Frenesi more guilty than Brock. In
the USA, and I imagine elsewhere in the west, it's considered important
to prove motivation when attempting to convince a jury of a defendent's
guilt, especially for a capital crime. Establishing motivation is important,
not just to lend logic to the state's prosecutorial effort in the minds
of the defendent's peers, sitting in the jury box, but also, to reveal to
society at large how the state defines the legal and illegal behavior of
individuals, with respect to the difficult balance between liberty and
justice. It is important for the prosecution to appear legitimate.

Cases in which no clear motivation can be demonstrated by the
prosecution are the most revealing in terms of the politicalization
of justice. Of course, the case might be overtly political, e.g., a 
bombing, where there is no clear motivation against specific individuals,
but the prosecution is deemed legitimate anyway, with the defendents
frequently being demonized in terms that reveal those things of which
society is most terrified (or uncomfortable about).

Frenesi is not insane, yet her motivations are unclear. The case
against her, especially if it is to made in moral terms, is politcally
revealing.

respectfully