Supreme Court Decisions
- Share via
I always thought that the essence of the American justice system was “better a hundred guilty go free than convict one innocent person.” It is a principle that has worked well for over 200 years.
Since William Rehnquist has been chief justice, the court has slowly sacrificed the rights of defendants on the altar of expediency. But who cares about the rights of criminals? So what if the search warrant is defective, if it’s only a good-faith error, we can allow the evidence to be presented to the jury since the defendants are guilty anyway. Innocent people have nothing to worry about, have they?
Now we learn that this Supreme Court believes there is nothing wrong in allowing an innocent man to be executed while they debate whether the Constitution requires evidence of innocence to be fully considered before execution (“Court to Decide If New Data Can Stay Executions,” Feb. 23).
This is not only contrary to this country’s tradition of “justice for all,” it is just plain crazy!
HERBERT SIMON
West Hollywood
Sign up for Essential California
The most important California stories and recommendations in your inbox every morning.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
More From the Los Angeles Times
Podcasts
John Orr was a renowned fire investigator who was also a prolific arsonist, and whose thinly veiled novel helped to convict him. In this episode we hear from the fire captain who first suspected him—and from Orr himself.
Madison McGhee is joined by legendary Dateline host Josh Mankiewicz and esteemed L.A. Times Reporter Richard Winton as the three of them dive into all-things Menendez Brothers, the good, the bad, and the still unknown.
NPR climate editor Sadie Babits talks about why the media has long overlooked the climate crisis, and how that’s starting to change.
