I like the discussion around torture and it's use in regards to law and the greater good.
Fontana should have just said no on the stand. The stand these days is less about truth in regards to religious integrity, and more about catching people in lies (in regards to statement and purjury), or one's own personal assumed honor code in telling the truth, which is subjective.
All in all, i support what Fontana did. And interestingly, so did Jack and Dworkin. That's a very interesting point, at least in regards to the situation about this case (Jack did oppose the torture in gauntanamo). These two men, knowledgeable in justice, and kind of like real-life heroes in our society, knew that Fontana was right in what he did, yet the law itself would have the defendant's case thrown out. What if he had commit murder during the case, and a little toilet action makes it all get thrown out? No. That's not just. That's trying to make the image of your justice clean, when underneath it's still dirty. I'd rather it be clean underneath and dirty on top, because at least then it would true and just and right. Flawed and worts n all, but right. It cannot be perfected in this age of humanity. Trying to perfect it, and perfect it with too heavy a dose of logic, can lead to great flaws and miscarriages of justice.
Review by WardVIP 8BlockedParentSpoilers2022-12-24T08:02:15Z
I like the discussion around torture and it's use in regards to law and the greater good.
Fontana should have just said no on the stand. The stand these days is less about truth in regards to religious integrity, and more about catching people in lies (in regards to statement and purjury), or one's own personal assumed honor code in telling the truth, which is subjective.
All in all, i support what Fontana did. And interestingly, so did Jack and Dworkin. That's a very interesting point, at least in regards to the situation about this case (Jack did oppose the torture in gauntanamo). These two men, knowledgeable in justice, and kind of like real-life heroes in our society, knew that Fontana was right in what he did, yet the law itself would have the defendant's case thrown out. What if he had commit murder during the case, and a little toilet action makes it all get thrown out? No. That's not just. That's trying to make the image of your justice clean, when underneath it's still dirty. I'd rather it be clean underneath and dirty on top, because at least then it would true and just and right. Flawed and worts n all, but right. It cannot be perfected in this age of humanity. Trying to perfect it, and perfect it with too heavy a dose of logic, can lead to great flaws and miscarriages of justice.