Remembering Lady Justice

This morning on ABC’s This Week, George Stephanopoulos took what seemed like forever repeatedly asking a White House spokesman whether President Trump believed the Roy Moore accusers.  I kept thinking to myself “what difference does it make what the President’s judgment is on this?”   But then, the round table discussion on this and other Sunday morning news shows all seemed to be in agreement that the president must take a stand on whether the women are telling the truth.  With that stand is an implied judgment of the guilt or innocence of the accused.  And they all sound like school children, demanding that everyone take sides.

Since when was it the president’s job to judge such disputes or to take a stand on every allegation of wrong claimed by one person against another?  I realize that President Obama made a practice of it in his rush to judgment in cases when a minority claimed to be aggrieved.  For example, he found the shooter of Treyvon Martin guilty, and similarly called out the police officer who responded to a burglary call and arrested a Black man he saw breaking into a residence.  In most cases the rush to judgment has proven incorrect.  There was no guilty verdict against Martin’s shooter.  The police officer was fairly doing his job when he arrested the apparent intruder and the charges were dropped when it was shown that the accused was breaking into his own home.  There have been many similar incidents and incorrect emotional judgments made without benefit of the facts.  And, when it comes to sexual allegations, we seem all too eager to rush to judgment without full facts (consider the college rape allegation/sensation published in Rolling Stone in 2014, that later proved false but not before ruining the lives of several young men.)

Such rush to judgment is harmful by anyone, but it certainly isn’t the president’s job to act as jury in these types of disputes.  Neither is it the job of the press to try and judge every case that raises public interest and emotion, yet that is what we seem to have these days:  public outcry replacing deliberate and reasoned justice.  And now, we demand the president also rush to judgment or be condemned for not doing so.

Today this is in the context of sexual assault allegations, but it could involve whatever is the current fancy of the public.  Let me just suggest a hypothetical to demonstrate the ridiculousness as well as the danger in demanding a rush to judgment.  Suppose a woman states that her boss entered her office and in discussing something she was working on that was displayed on her computer screen he came around to her side of the desk and leaning over her left shoulder towards the computer screen he placed his right hand on her right shoulder.  She complains, telling her story, perhaps tearfully, and believably.  The question is:  Is she telling the truth?;  and, the implication is that if so, then she was a victim of sexual harassment. 

Now let’s consider just some of the many possible scenarios and contexts for this incident that additional facts might provide, none of which attack her credibility in the statement that the man put his hand on her shoulder, but many of which provide very different interpretations of the event:  Perhaps she asked him to come around to look at the computer, had asked him to do so on previous occasions, and knew that when he did so he usually leaned his hand on her shoulder; perhaps they had previously dated and, following a break up she tells of this event; perhaps she is angry at her boss for not giving her a raise or a promotion, and a complaint about this act is a way of getting back at him or of excusing her own failure to move up the corporate ladder; perhaps he was fully focused on the information on the computer and simply needed a place to rest his hand and steady himself as he leaned forward to read the information more clearly; perhaps the event happened years ago and the actual memory is no longer clear, but over the years the woman has thought that maybe he placed his hand on her shoulder and her memory of it happening that way has become more and more certain over the years until that version has become the absolute truth in her mind; perhaps she is making the whole thing up, but has convinced herself that the incident did in fact occur; perhaps she thought nothing of it when it happened, but in today’s “me too” climate has now come to the conclusion that this was after all an act of harassment; and, perhaps the man’s whole intention was indeed to harass the woman, maybe even continue to slide his hand  forward until he could grab her breast, but she was able to stop him before he did so. 

Now, in each of the above scenarios the woman is telling the truth when she says the man placed his hand on her shoulder.  But, while some of the additional contexts might support his guilt of some level of harassment, all do not.  Yet, the current climate is that the woman asserts the act, society demands we believe her, and that we also therefore find the man guilty of harassment.  And those who will not outright affirm their belief in her statement will also be condemned for supporting the (as yet unproven) heinous acts of the accused. Then we simply move on.  And, if perhaps, the man is ultimately acquitted, we nonetheless continue to believe in his guilt while finding the woman has failed to receive justice and perhaps finding a systemic failure against women in the same way that when a police officer is acquitted for taking complained of action against a minority he is still often hounded as if guilty and there are often claims of systemic injustice against that particular minority group.  While this all may be very entertaining to some, and may provide some level of gratification to actual victims, it is not justice in any way whatsoever.

In America we have a strong and principled justice system.  It is not perfect and we can all find anecdotal evidence of times that justice has failed.  But, by and large it is a good system and more often than not it prevents injustices.  In the above hypothetical, in a court of law in which both sides present their evidence and all the relevant facts come to light, there would probably be a far fairer verdict than simply finding guilt based on the initial complaint alone.  There would likely be evidence of the hand being placed on the shoulder, supporting the woman’s allegation as truthful.   But additional facts would then determine whether or not this act, in its particular circumstances, constituted harassment and if so, to what remedy the woman was entitled.  That is justice.  It may not be as exciting or entertaining as rushing to judgment in the media, but it is far more fair and far less dangerous.

The symbol of justice wears a blindfold and holds a balance scale.  She is not swayed by media and public emotion, but instead weighs all the facts and evidence fairly.  The sword in her other hand, held lower than the scales, signifies that the evidence must come before any punishment, but when it does come that punishment will be both swift and final.   She does not support lynch mobs, but rather looks to the fair and reasoned deliberation of a jury.  She seeks truth and fairness, not immediate and emotional gratification.  And, when punishment is required, her goal is not to provide revenge, but to finds a way to appropriately recompense victims of wrongdoing in a way that allows them to move forward with their lives. 

Today, while there is focus on women, we seem to have forgotten the wisdom of Lady Justice.  We do not need rush to judgment about every allegation, nor do we need a rush to judgement about whether the president or anyone else believes the complainant is telling the truth.  What we do need is education about where one should take their complaints (to the courts, not social media and the courtroom of public or political opinion).  Ignoring the wisdom of our courts and our justice system is dangerous not only to individuals involved in disputes, but to our very democracy and way of life.   Everyone just needs to calm down, get over their need for immediate gratification and opinionating, and let Lady Justice do her job.