Justice for Jennifer

Written by R. A. Stewart

A criminal justice system needs to be fair to everyone; those affected by the offender’s action and the offender. Sentences must reflect the seriousness of the crime taking into account the various aggravating and mitigating circumstances.

Justice can mean different things to different people. 

I can tell you what justice is not. It is not a means of taking revenge on people who have wronged you. A sound justice system should not be an “Eye for an eye” system where whatever the offender did to someone then he or she faces the same punishment.

The “Get tough on crime” rhetoric spouted by politicians in the US and other countries around the world is only peddling to the vigilant brigade who are baying for blood. It may win some votes, and it may make some voters feel good for a while, but at the end of the day nothing changes. Voters must be getting fed up with politicians who jump on the prevailing bandwagon.

America already has the toughest sentences in the world and has proportionately the highest number of incarcerations per capita, and still, people commit horrendous crimes, usually with firearms as though there are no consequences for their actions.

This suggests that there is a mental health crisis in America rather than a criminal one. 

That being said, just because someone has been found guilty of murder, does not mean that they actually committed murder. There are people who have found themselves serving substantial sentences for a murder committed by others.

I am not speaking about those who have been wrongfully convicted, but rather those who fall under the felony rule.

Jennifer Mee from Florida is one of these. Jennifer was a party to a fatal robbery, but she was not in possession of a weapon, nor did she have any intent to kill. What I, and others have been saying is that Jennifer should not be responsible for another person’s use of a firearm.

Of course, politicians want to sound tough on crime, so they are reluctant to fix this kind of injustice.

Where do Donald Trump and Kamala Harris stand on crime?

Trump is talking tough on crime. It is likely that more executions will take place under Trump’s presidency and as for Harris. She has a more measured approach to crime, which Trump has described as being soft on crime. Ironic, since Trump's lawyers have spent a fortune keeping him out of prison. 

As for his stance on the death penalty, I don’t really see how anyone can claim to be pro-life and and at the same time be pro capital punishment.

Changes in the justice system need to be at a state level rather than at the Whitehouse and this is Jennifer’s best chance of ever getting out. Unfortunately, Ron de Santis, the Florida governor has a tough approach to crime and changes are unlikely while he is still the Florida governor. 

Is there anyone out there who has some ideas for going forward on this? I will be interested in hearing your views. Email me on floridalawchange@gmail.com