TEXT | sender: [ unknown ]

[spectates]

[ the screen flickers, glitching a bit as if it has somehow broken. barely visible beneath the glitches:

UNKNOWN DEVICE DETECTED
SEARCHING........
NETWORK DETECTED

the screen goes black, and shortly thereafter it restarts. the network appears as normal. ]

Chosen of Expiation, tell me about yourself. What is your purpose? What do you wish to return to? How do you define "justice"? How do you seek "rehabilitation?"

I wish to Learn.

Comments

[notthekingpin]

I said people do. I didn't say anything about my assumptions.

[ And he's not answering the question about Ben! ]

I don't think those statements are inconsistent. Anything made by humans is inherently biased, so a system that desires human connection is asking to add in inequities. It's about picking where you inequities come from. Even if you could craft a perfectly unbiased legal system, you'd have to face the inequities from outside of the system.

[spectates]

Then you propose that "justice" must be both unbiased as well as sympathetic? This is an interesting conclusion.

QUERY: please define "inequities from outside of the system." This is a concept that has, thus far, not been presented.

cw: referenced dv

[notthekingpin]

No, I'm simply suggesting justice doesn't have to be unbiased to necessarily be equal.

Okay, it's like this: you've got two kids. They're both 15 years old. Let's call them Ben and Jerry.

Little Ben tried to do well in school but his mind was always wandering. He couldn't focus, so the teachers were mad at him. He'd ditch school. His parents weren't around to stop him, so he started hanging out with kids in the neighborhood he shouldn't hang out with. Maybe Little Ben stole a pack of gum here or a teddy bear there. He's doing crime. An unbiased system sees only that. Ben is a thief, Ben should be punished. It doesn't see his history of mental health concerns, or his parents who constantly argued and couldn't pay attention to him. It didn't see the poverty in his area, the school books that were damaged, the overfilled classrooms that made it easy for him to sneak out. Given his rap sheet (of, you know, stealing candy), Little Ben is treated like an a career criminal, and when he makes a big mistake, he'll be treated like an adult.

Little Jerry, however, was wealthy. His parents had enough money to get him a good education. He went to the finest private school in the city, with a personal tutor to personally make sure he never ditched class. When he couldn't concentrate, the tutor got him back on track. His books were pristine, his afternoons filled. Little Jerry didn't have time for stealing gum or cigarettes. Also, Little Jerry's parents could buy him a playstation and took him to Stark Bucks every day on the way to school. So when little Jerry makes a mistake? Well, it's his first one. He'll get a slap on the wrist and go to juvie because he hasn't done anything before.

If justice is unbiased--if justice is blind--all that matters is what they did and how many times they've contacted the system before. But Little Jerry had a big head start on Little Ben, don't you think? He had everything handed to him on a silver platter. In essence, Little Ben gets punished simply for who he is, and that's a bias of its own.