Blind Justice

Posted May 27th, 2004 by AlphaPatriot and filed in Legal System

Ever hear the theory that better a guilty man go free than an innocent be unjustly imprisoned? Evidently Virginia doesn’t think that way:

BlindJustice.gifIn April, the Virginia Supreme Court turned down the petition for a new trial for Aleck J. Carpitcher, who was sentenced in 1999 to 38 years in prison for molesting an 11-year-old girl even though she recently told authorities she made up the whole incident to punish Carpitcher, who was at the time dating the girl’s mother. The justices cited state law, which allows consideration of “new evidence” only if it is submitted within three weeks of the sentencing date. [Daily Press (Hampton Roads)-AP, 4-21-04]


3 Responses to “Blind Justice”

  1. The Baculum King says:

    They were just following precedent:
    “Mere factual innocence is no reason not to carry out a death sentence properly reached.”
    –U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, Herrera v. Collins 506 US 390 1993

  2. AlphaPatriot says:

    You quote seems to be an invention of the Left’s propaganda machine. A review of the full text of the Herrera v. Collins decision does not show that Scalia, nor any other justice, said this. In fact, reading Scalia’s concurring opinion (in which he was joined by Thomas) reveals this quote which is very much at odds with the intent of the false quote:

    I nonetheless join the entirety of the Court’s opinion, including the final portion, ante, at 417-419 ? because there is no legal error in deciding a case by assuming, arguendo, that an asserted constitutional right exists, and because I can understand, or at least am accustomed to, the reluctance of the present Court to admit publicly that Our Perfect Constitution[fn*] lets stand any injustice, much less the execution of an innocent man who has received, though to no avail, all the process that our society has traditionally deemed adequate. With any luck, we shall avoid ever having to face this embarrassing question again, since it is improbable that evidence of innocence as convincing as today’s opinion requires would fail to produce an executive pardon.

  3. You are correct, I shouldn’t have taken the quote (and citation) at face value. How has a fake quote remained “active” so long??