Role of Stories, Rule of Law

I am as pleased that Judge Masipa was in charge of the Pistorius Trial rather than having a popular court as I am that Vascular Surgeons perform surgery rather than a chap in a restaurant who likes his steak bloody and is good with a knife. There is a reason we outsource justice rather than having mob courts. Justice should be slow, deliberate, thoughtful and free from emotion given the knock on effects. If there was a popular vote in South Africa, I am pretty sure that depending on the latest high profile case, there would be strong support for the death penalty. I am glad there is no death penalty. 64% of Muslims in Egypt and Pakistan support the death penalty for leaving Islam. I believe in Democracy, but not in the sense that we should all get to make all decisions. Delegation is really important when issues are complicated.

No one wins when these tragedies occur. Courts of law may try, but unless it is a civil case with money involved, you can't make things right. You can look to put things in place to try move forward in the best possible way. The mandate of courts should be limited in the same way as governments - the aim should be to deal with facts. It is up to the rest of us to heal and make the world a happier place.

 Rebecca Davis (@becsplanb on twitter) is a smart, thoughtful and funny journalist who seems to do a good job conveying the popular opinion. She often tweets on the views of car-guards and restaurant owners. She followed the case closely and her summary is worth reading.

She says:
But the intruder story is now the story. We can’t talk about violence against women, or how domestic violence spans all sectors of society, or how women’s bodies become the site on which the rage of angry men is vented. Because that’s not what happened here.

I agree that we can't talk about these issues because of Pistorius, but we should talk about all and any issues that can make the world a better place. Courts of law give beyond reasonable doubt because that makes the world a better place. Civil Courts work on a balance of probabilities because they deal with financial restitution and mistakes are easier to deal with. In public we can do what we want. We can imagine whatever we think MIGHT have actually happened, and we can prioritise responses that will make the world a better place. Conn Iggulden does that with Genghis Khan. He uses historical facts, but then embellishes to create a story in the bits we don't know. There could be multiple versions. There are a few facts that aren't in dispute in the Pistorius case. I would dispute that even Oscar knows exactly what happened. His memories would have been severely warped by the emotions surrounding the tragedy. The replays in his head and his court case in his head must be the stuff of nightmares and will go on. I have 0% doubt that he wouldn't choose to have that night undone.

So I think we can talk about violence against women. Even if courts can't get into bedrooms, dark alleys, or anywhere vaguely private where tragedies with just the victim and the accused occur - our imaginations can. They allow us to learn and make the world better. That is more important than a justice than 'makes things right'. It also means that we need to think about the areas where justice can't reach. We need to spend more time teaching men how to treat women. Rather, we need to spend time teaching people how to behave with people. We need to reduce the fear that controls us. We have lots to do.

We can't make the past right. We can influence the future.

Genghis Khan - art & stories help us learn where we don't and can't know

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genghis_Khan