Juries are made up of people such as yourselves. Maybe you have served on a jury. What did you experience behind the scenes?
Here's where I'm going with this. Many people on here and in our society think a victim has to be a "perfect" or "good" person...whatever that means to them. If a victim has more flaws...maybe the criminal shouldn't be punished as great as let's say...a child killer...or someone who assassinates a national hero.
Do juries give more time to those accused of killing "good" people? Do the victims that are of "questionable" nature with character flaws or even criminals themselves lower the punishment of their convicted killers?
Photo credit: kaleidoscopefilmdistribution.com
When victim rights advocates have tried so hard to even the playing field, calling a victim a victim and the punishment should fit the crime not the person...why are we still in a quandary over a person's character or life choices?
What do you think? Is there such a thing as a "victimless" crime? As cops, that term has come out of our mouths. Are we, too, biased about victims? Are you?