The Personal Website of Mark W. Dawson

Containing His Articles, Observations, Thoughts, Meanderings,
and some would say Wisdom (and some would say not).

Justice and The Rule of Law in America

Justice and the ideals of justice is something that mankind has struggled with for millennia to assure that Human Rights, Liberty, Freedom, and Equal Justice for All is attained. Justice requires that several things occur; a Just Process, Just Charging, Just Trials, Just Sentencing, and Just Imprisonment and Parole. In America today there are many issues within these topics that impact the quality of Justice. Many of these issues are complex and interrelated, which makes it difficult to discuss these issues in a comprehensive manner in a short article such as this. I readily admit that the following comments are not complete nor comprehensive. I also admit that there are many more issues than I have highlighted. My intent is to simply highlight for your consideration what I consider the main issues of these topics that impact the integrity of the Justice system in America.

Part I – Just Process

Without a Just Process, there can be no Justice. But the Just process requires that several concepts and tenets be enforced for Justice to prosper. These concepts and tenets are “Etched in Stone”. They are:


For Justice to Prevail the justice system must be founded on several concepts. They are:

Concept 1 - Due Process

Due process will be followed to assure equal protection for both the victim and the accused, as well as all litigants in a lawsuit. Rules of procedure and evidence are to be established and followed by both the prosecutor and defense, as well as the litigants in a lawsuit. Without due process, there can be no fair and equitable justice, and therefore there is no justice.

Concept 2 - Speedy Trial

Memory fades and becomes less accurate, confused, or forgotten over time for the accuser, the accused, the witnesses, and the litigants. Witnesses may become unavailable due to relocation or even death. Evidence may not be collected or collectible, or either accidentally or deliberately be destroyed as time goes by. The evidence may even decay or be lost over time. Without a speedy trial, justice will be perverted.

Concept 3 - Presumption of Innocence

The presumption of innocence is the principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty. It was traditionally expressed by the Latin maxim ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (“the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies”). In the United States, the presumption of innocence is a legal right of the accused in a criminal trial, and it is an international human right under the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Under the presumption of innocence, the legal burden of proof is thus on the prosecution, which must collect and present compelling evidence to the trier of fact. The trier of fact (a judge or a jury) is thus restrained and ordered by law to consider only actual evidence and testimony presented in court. The prosecution must, in most cases prove that the accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. If reasonable doubt remains, the accused must be acquitted.

Concept 4 - Trial by Jury

Trial by an impartial jury who only considers the evidence presented is essential to assure justice. Nothing but the evidence presented by due process should be deliberated. The defendant has the right to remain silent and nothing is to be inferred by their silence. The defendant has the right to confront the accuser and to cross-examine the accuser and the witnesses. The defendant has the right to examine the evidence against them, refute the evidence, and to submit evidence in their favor.

Concept 5 - Burden of Proof on Prosecutor or Plaintiff

The burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt is upon the prosecutor in a criminal case, and upon the plaintiff with a preponderance of the evidence in a civil case. The defendant need not prove their innocence, as they are presumed innocent until they are proven guilty. Nobody may be required to prove a negative (prove they didn't do or say something) as it is impossible to prove a negative, and the burden of proof is always upon the person or persons making an assertion.

Concept 6 - No Burden on Defense

The defendant has no burden to speak or present a case, and nothing is to be inferred by their not speaking or not presenting a case. The burden of proof is upon the prosecutor or plaintiff, not the defendant.


For Justice to Prevail the philosophy of the justice system must have several tenets. They are:

Tenet 1 - An Independent Judiciary

The Judiciary needs to be independent of those that create the laws (the legislature) and those that enforce the laws (the executive). The judiciary should be under no influence by the legislature or the executive to assure that the laws are justly applied for all. No one person or persons can influence the judiciary except through the concepts described above. The only constriction on the judiciary is that they operate within the bounds of the law and justly apply the law.

Tenet 2 - Probable Cause

Probable cause requires that no warrants are to be issued or criminal charged filed without a probable cause. Probable caused based on credible, verifiable, and substantiated evidence of wrongdoing. This also means that in the United States we do not start and investigation of a person, but only start an investigation of a possible crime when there is probable cause. Only when a person may be involved in a possible crime, and only with probable cause of the persons involvement, do we begin an investigation of a person. To do so otherwise would allow for "Witch Hunts" to occur. Without probable cause the accused stands to lose their reputation, employment, wealth, and even family and friends based on false allegations. These items should not be lightly taken from anyone without probable cause of wrongdoing. To do so otherwise would cause serious harm to an individual and the Liberties and Freedoms of all.

Tenet 3 - Equality Under the Law

“You shall do no injustice in court. You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor.”
- Leviticus 19:15 ESV

Equality under the Law has been recognized since Biblical time as necessary to achieve Justice. And without Justice, there can be no Freedom or Liberty. All must be treated as equals under the law. This means that within the jurisdiction of the law all must be treated equally. It does not mean that each jurisdiction must apply the same laws as another jurisdiction (i.e. a traffic violation within a jurisdiction must be applied equally within the jurisdiction, but another jurisdiction traffic law cannot be applied to any other jurisdiction).

When you place an adjective in front of the word “justice” you no longer have true justice- you have favoritism (i.e. “Adjective Justice”). Adjectives such as social justice, environmental justice, workers justice, gender justice, tax-payer justice, and voter justice, to name a few, require one party to be favored over another. Favoritism destroys the concept of “Equal Justice Under Law” and erodes Liberty and Freedom to the point where it is a meaningless concept. Within the judicial process, all must be treated as equals.

Tenet 4 - Equal Protection of the Laws

A clause in the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits states from denying “equal protection of the laws” to any person within its jurisdiction. Equal Protection does not specify that all people have to be treated equally under all circumstances. For instance, states may require people to pass a vision as a condition of receiving a driver’s license. However, states cannot deny a person a driver’s license because of their race, gender, or other minority considerations. This clause also states that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process and that no state can enforce laws that hinder the liberties and freedoms of its citizens.

The Equal Protection and Equal Justice Under Law doctrine is to assure that when a citizen is involved in any civil or legal action they are equally treated by the judicial system within the laws of the Federal, State, or Local province, and that all parties involved in the judicial action be treated equally under the law. It also means that all persons be treated equally by the bureaucracy of the executive branch of government. It further means that justice is blind – no person or persons is treated any differently within the judicial system based on external factors (such as unequal treatment based on race, religion, creed, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, age, veteran status, disability, military service, political affiliation, or other civil rights protected status). It does not mean that all States must abide by other State laws.

Tenet 5 - Pursuit of Justice

"A nation that will not enforce its laws has no claim to the respect and allegiance of its people."
- Ambrose Bierce

People have the human right to pursue justice for those who have done an injustice against them. However, people cede this right to pursue justice to society to assure that justice is required and that the guilt or innocence of the accused is determined through a fair adjudication process. This right is also ceded to society to assure the proper and just punishment of those who have been found guilty of committing an injustice against others. Therefore, justice must be pursued by society when injustices occur. No one can commit an injustice and expect to not face charges because of a lack of effort to pursue them. If society is not assuring that justice is enforced then the people have the right to alter society to assure justice, or to reclaim this right unto themselves.

Tenet 6 - Pardons and Commutations

Pardons and commutations are generally done to correct an injustice in the legal process or for the forgiveness for an individual based on their rehabilitation. They are not to be issued to groups of people or to allow evasions of a law. To issue a Pardon or Commutation for reasons other than stated above is to deprive the victim of injustice their right to justice for an injustice perpetrated against themselves. Any President or Governor who issues a pardon or commutation for any other reason should be subject to Impeachment and Removal from office for abuse of power reasons.

Types of Pardons and Commutations (from Law Street)

“Pardons and commutations are both types of “executive clemency.”  A commutation is when the president or governor cuts short the sentence of an individual who is currently incarcerated in some form. Essentially, a commutation says: “You’ve served enough time for the crime that you’ve committed, I’m going to take away the rest of your sentence.” This does not mean that the person whose sentence is commuted is innocent. The person’s conviction stays on their record, and they’re still subject to certain restrictions known as “civil disabilities”–for example, a felon whose sentence is commuted is still unable to vote in some places, own a gun, or sit on certain kinds of juries.  In contrast, a pardon is given after a person has already served their time, or passed away. According to the Department of Justice, it is given in “recognition of the applicant’s acceptance of responsibility for the crime and established good conduct for a significant period of time after conviction or completion of sentence.” A pardon does restore the civil disabilities that apply to convicted criminals. Like a commutation, a pardon doesn’t automatically take the person’s crime off their record. A released offender cannot apply for a pardon until at least five years have passed since their release. Pardons can also be granted somewhat preemptively, as President Gerald Ford did when he pardoned President Richard Nixon, which prevents charges from being filed or leads to the dismissal of charges already levied.  Pardons and commutations are by far the most well-known and frequently used forms of executive clemency. There are, however, other types that the president can exercise. One is called a “remission” and relieves the individual of the financial penalties associated with their conviction. Sometimes a remission is given as part of a commutation. Additionally, there’s a “respite,” which is sort of a pause in a sentence, usually given to inmates who are sick.”

Tenet 7 - Full Faith and Credit

Article IV, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, known as the “Full Faith and Credit Clause,” requires each state to recognize the laws, judicial decisions, and public records of the other states. This section helps to ensure that judicial decisions made in one jurisdiction will be recognized and honored in every other jurisdiction. One purpose for this is that it prevents someone from moving to another jurisdiction to avoid a court judgment, or to file a new lawsuit in an attempt to obtain a more favorable outcome on a matter that has already been decided.

The Full Faith and Credit Clause does not require a state to substitute another state’s law or policy for its own, which means it does not have to honor something that is specifically against its own law. The issue of licensure is an example of this limitation. For example, someone who has a driver’s license in Arkansas may legally drive during a visit to Missouri. If they move to Missouri, however, they will be required to obtain a driver’s license in their new home state. This holds true for hunting licenses, firearm licenses, and marriage licenses (although rarely done as each State extends a courtesy to other States in regard to marriage licenses) to name a few.  Licensed professionals are another example of each state being allowed to maintain and honor only their own legislation. Doctors, pharmacists, contractors, attorneys, and other professionals who want to practice in multiple states must obtain a separate license in each state.

Tenet 8 - Contract Law Enforcement

Contacts are a basis for a civil society. Whenever a legal contract is freely entered into by two parties, whether they be an individual, a group, a business, or an organization they need to be enforceable by law, and may not be unilaterally abrogated by one party or an outside party. Contracts assume the equitable exchange of something between the two parties. Equitable meaning both sides to the contract agree as to what is to be exchanged. The exchange can be but is not limited to, products, services, labor, property, or monies. Disputes between the parties to a contract can only be resolved by a fair and impartial judicial process. Without the surety of a contract, the liberties and the freedoms of the parties have been violated and society breaks down, and Liberty and Freedom will come to an end.

Just Process Summary

A Just Process must be sacrosanct in all legal proceedings. For without a Just Process it is impossible to achieve a just outcome. It has taken Western Society millennia to determine what constitutes a Just Process. Many people have had their Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness curtailed during this time due to an Unjust Process. Injustice has also resulted in mob violence, civil wars, and holocausts when Injustice occurs. It is not to be taken lightly, nor circumvented when inconvenient.

A Just Process must also be instituted for all governmental actions. The laws, rules, regulations, and procedures of government activities need a Just Process to assure the Liberty and Freedom of Americans. To not do so is to trample on the Human and Constitution Rights of Americans and is antithetical to the concept of Justice.  It is also an excellent guide in our public and private dealings and judgments of others. For without using these guidelines in our dealings with others it is too easy to reach a possibly wrong conclusion about someone. These wrong conclusions could lead to the person losing their reputation, employment, wealth, future opportunities, and even family and friends. These things should never be taken from anyone without credible, verifiable, and substantiated evidence of wrongdoing. To do so otherwise would cause serious harm to the individual and to the social fabric of our society.

Part II – Just Charging

The process of Justice begins with a Just Charge, for without being charged justly you cannot have Justice. This raises several issues as follows.

Indictments and Investigations

Grand Jury Proceedings and Criminal Investigations must always be done in secret. For during these proceedings much information is obtained that may be false and/or misleading. This information, if revealed, can cause irreparable harm to the person or persons being indicted or investigated. Indeed, this false and/or misleading information could be even about a person or persons that are not even the target of the Grand Jury proceeding or Criminal Investigation. It is only after a Grand Jury Indictment or Criminal Charges have been filed that the defendant has the full benefit of a Just Process.

Even the fact of the existence of a Grand Jury proceeding or Criminal Investigation must be kept a secret to protect the rights of the target, suspect, or witnesses of the proceedings or investigation. People who are involved in these Grand Jury proceedings and Criminal Investigations that leak any information about the proceeding and investigations should prosecuted for doing so, as they have betrayed the trust and rights of the target, suspect, or witnesses to these proceedings.

It should also be remembered that no Indictments or Charges should be lodged unless there is credible, verifiable, and substantiated evidence of wrongdoing, and the prosecutor believes that they can obtain a conviction that is beyond a Reasonable Doubt. To do so otherwise is to engage in a “Witch-hunt” that violates the rights of the defendant and does harm to Justice. When a prosecutor files a Grand Jury indictment or a Criminal Charge with the court they present the facts that they believe substantiates the indictment or charge, which are then the basis of a Just Process. Until that filing occurs all their efforts should remain secret.

Unfortunately, in today’s highly partisan and woke environment we have seen a significant increase in the violation of this legal principle. Especially if the target is a politician, businessman, celebrity, or politically active person. This will do irreparable harm to the concepts of Justice and we must correct this situation to ensure Justice for All.

Plea Bargaining

Plea Bargaining is a useful tool for prosecutors to obtain a conviction or information about other criminal activities by the accused or others. The accused often pleads to a lesser charge, or reduced sentence, or both as a result of the Plea Bargain. While justice is not completely served by a Plea Bargain at least some justice is served that may not occur in the absence of a Plea Bargain. Unfortunately, we have seen an increase in Plea Bargaining at all levels of the justice system. Often these Plea Bargains are justified, but at other times they are not. Too often a Plea Bargain is negotiated for economic or political purposes. Economic to reduce the workload and associated costs of the prosecutors and/or the courts, political due to social unrest concerns, connections or “Adjective Justice” (as explained in Tenet 3 of The Just Process section of this article). It should always be remembered that in all criminal actions there are two parties in the criminal action; the victim and society, and the perpetrator. When a prosecutor initiates a Plea Bargain, they need to keep in mind the balance of the needs of society, and the needs of the victim. Too often, however, the needs of the victim are secondary in the Plea Bargain process. For justice to prevail the victim and society need must be satisfied that a just charge and a just punishment of the convicted person has been applied.

Social Justice and Immunities

We have also seen an increase in the application of “Social Justice” in Plea Bargains and Charging. As I have stated later in this Article “Just Process, Tenet 3 - Equality Under the Law”:

When you place an adjective in front of the word “justice” you no longer have true justice- you have favoritism. Adjectives such as social justice, environmental justice, workers justice, gender justice, tax-payer justice, and voter justice, to name a few, require one party to be favored over another. Favoritism destroys the concept of “Equal Justice Under Law” and erodes Liberty and Freedom to the point where it is a meaningless concept. Within the judicial process, all must be treated as equals.

Therefore, Social Justice is only applicable to Social Policy and has no place under Just Process.

The other issue with charging the perpetrator is that of immunity. When a prosecutor gives immunity to a witness or suspect, and receives little or nothing in exchange, they are in effect giving a de facto pardon. And pardons may only be given by the President or a Governor for federal or state violations of laws respectively. Immunity must be carefully applied so that it does not subvert justice.

No Investigation, No Charging, Or the Dropping of Charges

We have also seen an increase of no investigation, no charging, or the dropping of charges against a perpetrator. The no investigation, no charging, or the dropping of charges is appropriate if the prosecutor is convinced that no crime has been committed or that there is insufficient evidence to convict a perpetrator. On occasion, however, we have seen the no investigation, no charging, or the dropping of charges based on political considerations. Considerations such as “Adjective Justice” or political implications, or political connections, and even political power. No person should be “Above the Law” and all credible, verifiable, and substantiated evidence of wrongdoing or criminality should be investigated. If the evidence supports the allegation they should then be prosecuted regardless of the status of the alleged perpetrator. There are numerous examples of this issue in America. For this article, I shall only present two that are illuminative of this issue.

The first example of this is the Jussie Smollett “alleged assault” case. On January 29, 2019, American actor Jussie Smollett told police that he was attacked in the early morning at the 300 block of East Lower North Water Street in Chicago's Streeterville by two men who physically attacked him after racial and homophobic slurs, poured an unknown chemical substance, possibly bleach, on him and tied a rope around his neck. On February 20, 2019, Smollett was indicted for disorderly conduct consisting of allegedly paying two Nigerian-American brothers to stage a fake hate crime assault on him and filing a false police report. Smollett's defense team reached a deal with prosecutors on March 26, 2019, in which all charges were dropped in return for Smollett performing community service and forfeiting his $10,000 bond. On March 27, 2019, it was announced that the FBI would be investigating as to why the charges were dismissed. Also, a state special prosecutor charged with reviewing the details and reportedly has the power to reinstate the original 16 charges. However, if not for the public visibility and outcry one is forced to ask would there be any Justice?

The next example of this issue is that for years this nation has watched Hillary Clinton “allegedly” break a plethora of laws without ever being held to account. Similar alleged criminal conduct by the likes of Jim Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, John Brennan, James Clapper, Sally Yates, and Bruce and Nellie Ohr have also been alleged so often they have become household names. Most recently we can add to this infamous list Joe Biden for his alleged misuse of the power of his office to extort a foreign country for his son’s personal financial benefit. However, some of these people may now be held to account for their actions as a result of a Justice Department investigation. But one is forced to ask that if President Trump was not elected would there be any Justice?

Just Charging Summary

While all the persons have the right of presumed innocence, they do not have the right to not be investigated or charged for alleged crimes. And, unfortunately, the Plea Bargaining, the “Adjective Justice”, the no investigation, no charging, or the dropping of charges is not an uncommon occurrence in today’s criminal justice system. This leads to Justice not being blind but being subverted. And if this continues we will no longer have “Equal Justice for All” in America.

Part III - Just Trials

A Just Trial is essential for Justice. The rights of the defendant must be preserved, but the interests of society and the victim and their families must also be served. A Just Process must be implemented in a trial, and the rules, regulations, and procedures of the Court must be enforced. And these rules, regulations, and procedures must be formulated and codified with both the defendants’ rights and the interests of society and the interests of the victim and their families in mind. The most important aspect of a Just Trial is that a Just Process must be enforced to obtain a Just Trial. I would, therefore, refer you back to the Just Process section of this article for more information.

Just Trials Summary

Fortunately, in America, we have evolved these courtroom procedures, in most cases, to achieve this goal. However, there is always room for improvement, and we should strive to improve these courtroom procedures when appropriate to assure that the rights of the defendant must be preserved, but the interests of the victim and their families are also served.

Part IV – Just Sentencing

We should also remember that laws are meaningless if there are no consequences or deterrence for violating them. Therefore, not only should a Just Process prevail but a just punishment must be imposed for those convicted of violating the law. To do so otherwise makes Justice inconsequential.

This begs the question “What is a Just Punishment?’. In the Biblical sense it is “an eye for an eye”, but as Coretta Scott King later used this phrase in the context of racial violence: "The old law of an eye for an eye leaves everyone blind". Therefore, a Biblical (or Torah) punishment is often not a just punishment.

Regarding sentencing, you must always keep in mind the Bill of Rights Amendment VIII

“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted”

In America, we have done a good job assuring that no cruel and unusual punishments are inflicted. However, we have not done such a good job in assuring the appropriate punishments are imposed. Sentencing for the same crime varies widely not only across America and within the States but also within the same jurisdiction of the courts. And the sentences imposed, on the surface, do not seem to reflect the severity of the criminal activity. Sentencing guidelines have been implemented but they often seem to be violated or breached. Extenuating circumstances are often utilized to justify these sentences. Often it is an emotional response to the extenuating circumstances that drive this sentencing. We must remember that only a person is responsible for their actions and extenuating circumstances is only a contributing factor for their actions. Extenuating circumstances are usually utilized by the convicted person to receive a lighter sentence. However, extenuating circumstances need to be balanced by the impacts of the crime on the victim and their families. The victim or their family members need to be involved in all sentencing procedures to help determine the proper sentencing of the defendant. But emotional responses to extenuating circumstances and the pleas of the victim and their families do not often serve the purpose of Justice. We must counterbalance the extenuating circumstances and the pleas of the victim and their families with the impact on society and the victim and their families. And sentencing decisions should not also be explained to the victim and their families but also to the public at large.  Only then can we assure that a Just Sentence is imposed and that Justice has prevailed.

Just Sentencing Summary

Without a Just Sentence, Justice cannot be served. Justice for not only the Defendant but also for society and the victim and their families. We must always keep this in mind when imposing a sentence.

Part V – Just Imprisonment and Paroles

Finally, Imprisonments and Paroles must be justly applied. Not only for the inmates but for society and the victims as well.


In America we have eliminated “cruel and unusual punishments” but we still have the issue of Just Imprisonments. Prisons need to be safer and more humane to be just. For a myriad of reasons, too numerous to mention here, most of our prisons are unjust. Of course, when you assemble persons who are anti-social, sociopathic, or violent you will have difficulties. But difficult does not mean impossible. However, the possible may be expensive to achieve.

We need to address the problems of prisons in order to assure Justice. Too often our prisons harden an inmate which increases the recidivism rate of released inmates. When they are released they pose a further danger to persons and society. Prisons also need to be safe for their inmates, and for the guards and other personnel who administrate them. The rules, regulations, and procedures for prisons and prisoners need to be reformed to assure this safety as well as a just imprisonment.

Along with this, we must focus on rehabilitating inmates, so that when they are released they can be contributing members of society, and help reduce the recidivism rate. Psychological and spiritual counseling needs to be increased to help them adjust their behavior, as well as education and job training that will assist them once they are released. This would also help determine which inmates are eligible for parole.

Perhaps we can do a better job of constructing and managing prisons based on the criminality and psychology of the inmates. Separating them into different prisons based on their criminality and proclivities, with different rules, regulations, and procedures at each type of prison may help alleviate this problem. Some would say that this currently happens, but I would say it doesn’t happen enough given the problems we encounter at prisons.


Paroles are a just ideal fallibly implemented. The ideal is that if an inmate has shown to be responsible, remorseful, and rehabilitated then they should be released early to become a contributing member of society. But only after they have paid their debt in full for their criminal acts, and only if there is a sincere belief that the inmate will not be a danger to others and society, should they be paroled. “Paid In Full” is a difficult concept to define, but it should always be kept in mind that justice to the victim or the family of the victim is satisfied. Not a danger to others and society is difficult to predetermine, but their behavior in prison may be indicative of their future behavior. Too often, however, these concepts do not appear to be the primary reasons for parole.

There are too often political and economic pressures brought forth to justify paroles. These pressures should never be considered when evaluating an inmate for parole. An intellectual decision, rather than an emotional response, should only be utilized when considering a parole.

Just Imprisonment and Paroles Summary

Our prisons and paroles must be reformed for Justice to prevail. As Justice is one of the primary goals of our society the expense required to accomplish this must be a priority. Therefore, let us start to build and rebuild our prisons, and reform the rules, regulations, and procedures to assure they are just. Let us also reform our paroles system to assure that justice is served.

Final Thoughts

In a civilized society, Justice is not carried out by the victim or their family. The victim or their family cede Justice to society in the hopes of obtaining proper Justice. In doing so the victim or their family expects justice for themselves to be carried out. If the victim or family does not think that justice has prevailed, then Justice has eroded. All decisions of the prosecutor and courts should be reviewed with the victim or their family members to assuage their concerns and assure them that Justice has prevailed.

No system of Justice is perfect. Justice has many shades of grey and involves human interactions that are complex. And humans make mistakes so, therefore, Justice makes mistakes. We should all strive to correct these mistakes to assure that Justice will prevail.

Many would say we need to address the root cause of criminality to reduce criminality. Of course, we need to examine the root causes of criminality. But determining the actual root causes, and the proper social policy to address this is very difficult and beyond the scope of this article. But it must be remembered that even if the root causes are addressed you will still have criminality. This is because criminals are human and as such, they make mistakes and poor decisions. In addition, some people are inclined to or predisposed to criminality and nothing society can do can change this. For those people, we need to have Justice and The Rule of Law in America.

If we give up on these ideals of Justice we are giving up on Justice and going backward to despotism. Despotism in which Power, Mob Rule, and Favoritism determine Justice, which is not Justice but tyranny. God help us all if this becomes our standard of Justice.

But it is most important to remember:

To assure Justice for All you must dedicate yourself to Justice.
Not only Justice for yourself but Justice for all.
To do otherwise means there will be No Justice for Anyone.

Note - In my article "The Rule of Law in Non-Judicial Proceedings" I examine the concepts of a Just Process in political discourse and deliberations.