Casey Anthony 脫了殺女罪，但因4項誤導警察罪每項被處以最高刑期判監1年，並每項罰款1000元，分期執行，共坐監4年，減去扣押的時間及獄中行為良好，7月13日就刑滿出獄。陪審團的荒謬裁決使她得以脫罪，法官對她的判刑也犯原則性錯誤wrong in principle。4項誤導警察的控罪都源於掩飾殺女的行為，屬於part and parcel。因案情嚴重而判以最高刑期，無可厚非，但4項控罪分期執行，恐怕犯了原則上的錯誤。法官不能因被告僥倖脫罪而用其他方法來懲罰她，雖然那是大快人心的做法。你可能覺得標少立場矛盾，既然覺得被告罪不可逭，幹嗎又為她抱不平？當我看法治的時候，應該撇開個人感情，用客觀獨立的眼光去批判，才不會把理智冲昏。
法院外站着不滿裁決而前往抗議的人，不少是衝着陪審團而來，指責他們是幫兇。陪審團這種制度，古已有之。在英國而言，大概是13世紀被大憲章Magna Carta進一步確定這種以同儕的價值觀作審判(trial by peers)的方法。大憲章裏多處闡述以鄰里同業來釐定審判及處罰的標準。(None of these fines shall be imposed except by the assessment on oath of reputable men of the neighbourhood.)(To any man whom we have deprived or dispossessed of lands, castles, liberties, or rights, without the lawful judgement of his equals, we will at once restore these.)Men of the neighbourhood及judgement of his equals就是現代的陪審團。
以陪審團來判斷被告是否有罪，當然具不少好處，譬如可以用社會一般人的價值觀及看法來判斷，以免法官對社會實況掌握不足而與時代脫節。以前香港從海外聘用外藉裁判官，在他們履任的初期，會安排社會賢達、太平紳士之類的人坐在旁邊，解釋有關社會風俗人情，方便了解。這種安排大概到了1990年之前全面本地聘請法官才取消。
陪審團審案當然也存在不少缺點，遇上複雜的案情如商業詐騙，或複雜的法律概念，都會產生理解能力的問題。最大的問題是無人知道他們在裁決之前怎樣討論而得出結論。其實何必怪責某件案的陪審團，無論甚麼制度，總有缺點，總有天理不容，法律卻制裁不到的人。我們唯有多思考，多批判來充實自己，冷眼看世事。「多行不義必自斃，子姑待之」，是或然率的問題，或者只是一廂情願的期許，wishful thinking 而矣。有人上得山多不遇虎，有人第一次上山已喪於虎口，不是或然率嗎？
After watching the "On Trial" TV series, I guess the information the Juries got might not be the same as the general public. We are all affected seriously by the reports in the media but what the Juries heard in the court could be another story. Perhaps the Defense Lawyers were skillful enough to mislead the juries or we are all being misled by the media.
回覆刪除Henry,
回覆刪除I don't think the jurors were misled by the defence counsel in this case. The problem with this case is that some of the forensic evidence adduced by the prosecution was vigorously challenged by the defence weakening the prosecution case in the end. Defence also called a lot of expert witnesses to challenge the finding of the prosecution experts and in the end much of prosecution's forensic evidence was thrown out. The media reports gave people the impression of a very strong case against the defendant. In reality it might not be as strong as you had thought. But still, I read quite thoroughly and feel that there was sufficient evidence to convict. If I were one of the jurors, I would certainly peruade all other jurors to convict. The circumstances, the failure to report the disappearance of the girl and the lies of the defendant, all point to the guilt of the defendant. Irresistible inference of murder can be drawn in this case. The defendant, while her daughter was "missing", visited the tatoo artist and tattooed the Italian words "Bella Vita" on her body, which means "the beautiful life". (Lindsay Lohan also gets the same tatoo on her back.)The defendant was described by the prosecutor as a lying care free slut. This appropriate description also shows the motive of murder. She wants to get rid of the daughter to lead her partying life.