Letter: Legal revenge an affront to victims
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Mary Dejevsky ("Americans seek head of public enemy number one", 4 June) courageously describes as "distasteful" the euphoria after the jury's verdicts in the McVeigh trial.
What is more distasteful is the bloodthirsty procedure described in Jack O'Sullivan's article ("Wanted: but dead or alive?", 4 June) whereby survivors and victims' relatives will provide evidence to the jury in support of the death penalty. That they and prosecution lawyers should be planning to use film and photographs of victims (Baylee Almon's "first and only birthday party") is an affront to their memories and presupposes their (ungiven) consent.
The punishment should fit the crime, not the theatrical tricks of lawyers and the revenge sought by understandably distraught (and unobjective) victims and relatives.
We can only hope that Jack Straw will reverse the populist and vindictive trend in judicial proceedings and concentrate on measures which will restore confidence in an efficient and impartial judicial system, where criminals are caught, prosecuted and punished by the state. Victims need compassion and, in certain circumstances, counselling and compensation: they should be neither asked nor allowed to get involved in sentencing.
MICHAEL VARCOE-COCKS
London W6
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments