Justice system goes back on word
Campus Times
November 14, 1997
With the latest word from Judge Hiller B. Zobel on his reduction of
the charges to involuntary manslaughter against Cambridge, Mass., au pair
Louise Woodward and his compassionate resentencing of Woodward Monday to
the 270 days in prison, which she had already served, the same question
arises in our society as it did two years ago when O.J. Simpson was acquitted
of double murder; is our justice system working in America?
To even start to answer that question is a chore in itself. We must
first look at the evidence set before our eyes as it unfolded on national
television and piece together a logical puzzle of guilt or innocence. In
the Woodward case, the jury acted to carefully piece this puzzle together.
The jury carefully considered that even though Woodward's age of 17
constituted that she might not have known what the proper thing to do was,
still the fact cannot change that Woodward shook a baby to its death to
prevent him from crying. This must have been the reason why the jury convicted
her of murder as it deliberated only 27 hours before delivering the verdict
on Oct. 30.
On Monday, Nov. 11, a shock was heard around the world as a strange
atmosphere surrounded the Cambridge, Mass., court room when Judge Zobel
asked for last words from the defendants before sentencing. Although Woodward
was represented by a team of lawyers, including former Simpson lawyer Barry
Scheck, she stood up and stated her innocence, yet again, to Judge Zobel
and was almost pleaded to sit down by her defense team.
Judge Zobel, noticing the stream of emotion in the case, immediately
asked for a short recess to consider his decision. This point in the trial
is when the justice system failed to work in the most equal way. When Judge
Zobel sentenced Woodward to time served, the motion was immediately appealed
vocally by the prosecution, as they seemed to be outraged, and rightly so.
With his decision to set free Woodward, Judge Zobel is acting as a compassionate
person, but the politics of his decision play a bigger role in why he both
violated the victim, 8-month-old Matthew Eappen, and his parents who lost
their beloved child.
It is a tough decision for a judge under so much pressure from the media
to make and much like Judge Lance Ito from the O.J. Simpson case, Judge
Zobel made politically correct decisions. His decision might have been heavily
weighted by the consequence of sentencing a British au pair to years in
prison and the effect on relations between British and U.S. officials.
In Judge Zobel's case he is acting to relieve his burden of responsibility
to justice in order to avoid becoming the blame of incarcerating the somewhat
well-known Woodward.
Woodward should serve a sentence in prison for the wrongful death of
an innocent child. By letting people like Woodward go free, we as a society
are saying that it is OK for a British au pair to shake a baby to death
because she did not understand our procedures of child care in the United
States.
The irony in the decision is that if Woodward would have been an U.S.
citizen, she would have been sentenced to a long prison sentence and, in
turn, justice would have prevailed. In this case, the justice system failed.
Judge Zobel let politics and compassion rule his decision, not the virtues
of equality which he took an oath on.
Scott Harvey, a junior journalism major, is sports editor of the
Campus Times. He can be reached by e-mail at harveys@ulv.edu.
