← Back to context

Comment by gruez

6 hours ago

>This feels like a disingenuous question. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure [...]

If all you have is vibes, then it's a pretty legitimate question.

>Public health, frequency, scale of impact (more often, who is impacted that has resources to compete in court) et al are all considerations.

That's exactly not how the legal system is supposed to work. Bending the rules just because some defendant is particularly unsympathetic is exactly how you get politically motivated prosecutions and kangaroo courts.

> That's exactly not how the legal system is supposed to work.

It is. This is a misunderstanding of how justice works. People (judges, juries, et al) determine the impact of situations, not machines following abstract rules.

  • Find a case of someone found criminally liable for something that normally can't be held criminally liable for, and whose trial isn't considered by legal experts to be a legal farce by international legal experts? The latter might sound like me trying to do a no true scotsman, but it's needed to weed out stuff like struggle sessions in communist regimes.