Justice system is missing key method

Published 12:04 am Wednesday, July 13, 2011

So far as we know, Casey Anthony is the only person who knows how Caylee died, what happened to her before she died and what happened to her body after she died.

If the system were changed so that it be permissible to put Casey into solitary confinement until she told the whole truth, she eventually would consider a choice: Continue without end to “rot” in solitary with no public contact, or tell the whole truth and face whatever punishment a jury and court deemed just.

This system, of course, would only be used when it is known absolutely that a person is involved in a possible crime. If there had been an accident, the sentence would need to be in accord.

Email newsletter signup

Even if Caylee died because of negligence, the sentence would be better than solitary for life, and Casey would eventually talk.

With the present system, which Casey’s lawyers are so pleased with, Casey can now barter her secret for millions with the publishers.

We owe little Caylee and future victims and ourselves a much better system.

A few years ago, a monster raped and murdered a little girl. Authorities were unable to find her body.

The monster and his lawyer cut a deal with prosecutors. He would show them the child’s body in exchange for exemption from the death penalty.

Prosecutors felt they had little choice and accepted.

Again, we need solitary confinement (no TV, books, etc.) until the secret-keeper confesses.

If there is no confession, the person known to have been involved rots in solitary endlessly.

And if the accused decides to lie, and is caught, they would go to prison upon appropriate sentence by the judge and jury.

Of course, whatever the accused’s tale might be would have to stand up under investigation before trial.

I do not believe in the Fifth Amendment.

I believe the public is entitled to the whole truth in every case, and I do not believe an accused should be allowed not to testify.

Those who would argue that there is risk that a jury might still get it wrong and convict an innocent person who testifies should consider how more likely it is that a jury will get it wrong when the truth is withheld, as is done now.

Lynn Wirtz

Adams County resident