Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
I think people are confused because you’re labelling what he did as “morally wrong” which is confusing because either A) he did what he’s accused of and it’s worse than morally wrong or B) he didn’t do what he’s accused of and there’s nothing that would be morally wrong.
But the evidence seems to suggest he did what he was accused of and he got a slap on the wrist for it.
|
I would argue he didn't even get a slap on the wrist legally, he was punished internally at his place of employment, which was CPS. Internal discipline for you and I at work isn't the same thing as being legally charged.
There is public opinion and there is the legal system. In the eyes of the legal system there is a massive difference between the situation Sean Chu was in recent months and where Carra is as of today. That is preciously why members of council have taken a very very different tone in public comments.
With Sean Chu, rightfully or wrongfully, everybody on council was putting their $.02 into the conversation. With Carra, it's all "No comment" since the matter is before the courts as he was officially charged.
People sometimes confuse what justice actually means. Justice does not mean you and I get the results WE want from a particular case. It does not guarantee a conviction or an acquittal in a particular case.
I get why this particular councilor has a lot of people all up in arms, a lot of people want justice for what happened but we need to make sure we differentiate between the court of public opinion and the courts. Those lines in today's internet fueled rage are getting more and more blurred. Lot's of hastags and twitter trending topics but ultimately all we have is the court system to decide.
I haven't seen the specific evidence in Sean Chu's case or file. If there is enough evidence that a sexual assault charge is warranted now, than by all means, charge him. The same goes for everybody in the same category in other high profile public cases. Simple as that.
As for Carra , he lead everybody to believe he gave a little love tap to someone's bumper and may have left a scuff on someone's car. Given the fact that he was charged by an outside police agency, in consultation with the crown, there is probably more to this particular story. I am in no way comparing the two alleged offenses in any way, don't take that the wrong way.
I was never defending the guy but I am also able to see the difference between something morally wrong and something legally wrong. Sometimes it goes the opposite way and you can do something legally but it still be morally wrong in my opinion.