The Icing on the Cake
Ah, first impressions! It’s always a spectacle to see someone meet me and, with that X-ray look, think: “Look, another nice bitch…” And off they go, without even considering that I could be fascinating company for a good conversation. Arrogance? No way, it’s just a lack of practice.
This reminds me of a time when my family’s finances were tighter than a diving suit. My mother, always full of ideas, suggested we go shopping. As usual, she dressed as if she were going to have tea with the queen: elegant, looking like Jackie O herself. We went into a designer store, and my mother was immediately surrounded by saleswomen and even the manager, all smiling as if they had seen a celebrity. Soon after, a girl came in wearing jeans and a T-shirt, looked at the racks for a good ten minutes and left without being served. My mother, with a mischievous smile, whispered in my ear: “Little do they know that I don’t have a penny in my purse and that the girl who just left was probably ready to make a big purchase.” And she continued to entertain the manager with a conversation that would lead nowhere.
It’s fascinating how people believe that others always present themselves exactly as they are. Right and wrong have no set criteria. We still live in a society where appearances dictate behavior. And this makes me think about the legal “judgments” that we see every day. It’s disheartening to realize that, after thousands of years, we still continue to JUDGE PEOPLE and not their ACTIONS.
In a real trial, the focus should be on the offense committed, not on the individual. Any good defense can argue that a thief is also a good family man, that a corrupt person helped people in need, that a murderer was moved by tragedy, and so on. We continue to judge a book by its cover. If we judge the person, we run the risk of being influenced by aspects that may or may not be true and end up making gross mistakes.
Should I be moved because someone is going to eat badly in prison after living a life of luxury, or because they did what they did under orders and were afraid to say no? This business of considering a defendant's past life or their attributes is very dangerous. What is being judged is the act, and each act has a consequence. Again, it is very simple: cause and effect (what is the cause? The shot fired. What is the effect? Someone's death). Action and result (what is the action? Misappropriation of public funds. The result? Emptying the social coffers). The rest is icing on the cake, which certainly does not guarantee the flavor.
Any deliberation is more efficient (and faster) when we take the focus off the individual and put it on their act! I have no interest in knowing what happened before, or what led someone to commit an offense; This type of information is only relevant when deciding the length of the sentence, and even then with certain reservations. The individual's history is absolutely irrelevant when we are faced with a proven fact. Just because someone was capable of a dignified act does not mean they are not capable of committing misconduct!
© Copyright Tempo De C Ver