Tachille OctavienPeriod 4

May 17, 2011Is Justice Blind?

The Cases of Jean Valjean and Thenardier

Blind justice? What is the exact meaning of this controversial term? Well the concept of “blind justice” refers to the law being viewed objectively. Decisions for the punishment or freedom of the accused is not judged based on bias or prejudice acts. Basically it would not matter if the accused was a friend or not, everyone would get the same penalty and treated as equals. But is justice really blind?

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

“Blind justice” is depicted as the goddess of justice named Justitia who has a scale in one hand, a sword in the other, and a blindfold over her eyes. The scale that is usually located in the goddesses left hand represents the weighing of support and opposition of the case presented. The sword commonly located in Justitia’s right hand reflects the power of reason and is used for or against the accused. The blindfold that the goddess wears is the representation of her judgment being unbiased and absolutely based on facts that are presented to her unseeing eyes but makes her verdict based on what she hears which goes by the saying “Justice is blind, not deaf”.

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

In reality justice is not blind. In the film Les Miserables, the accused, which

were poor and starving, were presented in front of a jury of wealthy men who did not have empathy for these “bottom feeders”. How would these rich snobby men know

anything about the lives and situations the poor are presented with everyday? The automatic

response of the jury are obviously judged with bias attitudes resulting in sever punishment of the accused.

The case of Jean Valjean and Thenardier are perfect cases in which justice was not blind. Jean Valjean was a man who lived and walked the streets in hunger everyday trying to suppress his hunger that he fought with each waking day. He was later featured in front of a jury for stealing a loaf of bread. What the jury did not know or did not bother to find out was that he committed this crime because he was trying to feed his family. The court sentenced him 19 years in prison and during his sentence. Valjean was abused and had his dignity taken from him. The court was unjust in their decision. What these wealthy men failed to realize or try to understand is that the government in which they live wholesomely by refuses to feed these poor peasants and so these unwealthy people are bound to try to get food by any means necessary. Basically the judicial system is a set up to keep poor people poor and wealthy people wealthy. Jean Valjean should not have given such a harsh treatment for such a petty crime, which was committed unselfishly.

On the other hand there is Thenardier who committed fraud and robbery but was not punished at all. Thenardier owned a small inn, which means he had some source of income. He and his family housed a child named Cosette whom’s mother would send money to her caretakers every month. Thenardier noticed that Cosette’s mother, Fantine had a source of income also and so he started to demand for more money buy using the excuse that her young daughter was sick and the money was needed to buy her medicine. He committed the act of fraud by lying in the letters that were sent to Fantine about her 8-year-old daughter and he committed robbery by robbing Fantine of her money and threatening to put young Cosette out if she did not meet their demands. Also he robbed Cosette of her childhood by making her work all of her eight years. Now Thenardier is not rich but has enough money to manage a life with his family. Why was he not put before a jury? Well evidentially the court doesn’t recognize people who are well off. The court mainly focuses on the poor.

Valjean and Thenardier both committed crimes punishable by law but should be treated differently. Contrary to the different treatment that is already present between the two, Valjean should have been treated with more leisure. Jean Valjean stole food for survival of him and his family and should’ve been taken into consideration by the strict jury. His criminal act was not of greed and selfishness as Thenardier act was. Thenardier was a money hungry second hand thief. His thief was way more serious than what Valjean was guilty of there for he should have spent those 19 years of abuse in the prison.

In the law there should be a place of mercy for the accused. All facts about the person and the reason behind the crime should be tooken into consideration during the decision-making. Though many law-abiding citizens believe that all crime, no matter the reason, should be punishable by law but not realizing the unjust words of which they preach. Here by bringing up the question again, “Is Justice Blind? No.

Bibliography

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Justice

http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/41/messages/748.html

http://www.justiceblind.com/

http://mdean.tripod.com/justice.html