Maintaining Our Country's Foundation

Now, we do have in our Bill of Rights the right to a trial. When I heard and even read articles that vehemently asserted that the accused man really does not even need to go on trial because of all the evidence against him (video, witnesses, etc.) and therefore he should be sentenced straight away, my stomach lurched with horror.

     Yes, what was done was terrible indeed. However, he still has to go to trial and be found guilty. I mean, and I hope I am saying this correctly, because the deed he is accused of is considered an act of terror against the US and the people of this nation does that mean he can be denied the right to trial? I am not saying that is what is happening. I just want to know if there is anything in our Constitution or Bill of Rights that states acts considered to be treason and a threat to national security automatically negate rights? I do not think so.

     Much of the conversation/articles that supported some type of revocation of the rights of this man carried an air of, "Well, he hates the US and its citizens and our government. Considering such, why should the rights afforded by the Bill of Rights of this nation that he hates so much extend to him?"

     Then there was the issue of the man not being properly read his Miranda Rights. Why in the world did they allow him to continue? Was it because they were afraid he would not say anything at all if they did? Wouldn't that be his right to remain silent? Was an attorney present for the man, and if so why didn't the attorney stop the man and insist Miranda Rights be read? Shocking to me also was an article in which  Representative Peter King, R-NY, is noted as saying he "totally disagreed" with the decision of the magistrate to read the accused his rights at a hearing.

     By asking these questions I absolutely do not intend any disrespect for the victims and their families or Boston. I love this country and our citizens, yes. Granted I say this without being a victim and without having any of my family and friends fall victim, but if people allow their anger and hatred for this man and his violent cause to create some kind of validation for breaching rights that are at the very core of this nation's foundation, well, if that happens a very dark, very ugly precedent may be set.

     Our justice system may not be perfect in application, but one of the reasons we have the laws and Constitution and Bill of Rights of this country is to strive for fairness and equality in the eyes of the law. There is, I think, an implied understanding and assertion by the drafters of our founding documents that what makes a nation strong, THIS nation strong, persevering, and lasting is a persistence to be just, and that the drive for justness/justice does not include the allowance of strong emotions of revenge/vengeance to dictate where and when and why rights may or may not be extended to the accused. 

     I understand the fear and the anger, the resentment and the sheer loathing for the accused. Like many people of this nation I still vividly recall 9/11 and the fear, sorrow, hurt, and even rage that I felt. But the last thing people of this nation should do is establish any kind of habit, political or otherwise, that undermines the purpose of our foundation and what sets this nation apart as an example for the rest.

     It is important that Americans remember the manner of approach taken in the prosecution of some of the Nazi leaders for war crimes at the trials at Nuremberg. Many government leaders including Winston Churchill, Joseph Stalin, and to a lesser degree FDR at first supported summary executions.

     However, while the world waded through the aftermath of WWII, trying to comprehend the scope of the inhumane, atrocious, and evil actions that brought about the deaths of tens of millions of people, US Secretary of War, Henry Stimson argued for the war trials to be commenced with the basic rights of due process as so noted in the US Bill of Rights.

     Stimson argued that such an approach would help to uphold the "democratic notion of justice" and that the purpose of the trial was for "prevention and not for vengeance." Because of this approach the Nuremberg Trials will be remembered in part for being consistent with due process.

     It would serve this nation and it's leaders and it's people well to remember and consider this.