Letter of the Day | The justice system is a joke

THE EDITOR, Madam:

Where is the restitution in the case involving the little boy whose penis was severed by a teenager in St Thomas?

That’s it? The convicted teenager is just going to get a slap on his wrist and walk free after his short prison stint? And then what happens to the little boy who has lost his future manhood? How will he function in society? I am deeply concerned for his future welfare.

The six-year-old boy, now almost eight, is twice castrated, mutilated and emasculated by the sentence handed down to his attacker. The learned judge, in handing down the sentence, has erred and underestimated the heinous crime committed against the tiny boy and the long-lasting effects of the gruesomeness.

Today he’s eight, what about when he reaches 21 or 30 years old; when he’s in his prime? What prime? He won’t be able to have a normal life with a wife or children. His manhood is gutted from him.

Irrespective of the plea for leniency from defence counsel and the fact that the troubled teenager pleaded guilty and did not waste the court’s time, the penalty is not commensurate to the offence. No wonder the population has no confidence in our justice system. And criminals flout the law and act with impunity, to the point where hoodlums can barge into a church and snatch the life of a worshipper.

Jamaica does not need any more laws, Dr Chang, we already have the legislative framework to tackle crime. What we want is proper interpretation and application of the laws and serious custodians of the law.

Three years and seven months’ prison sentence is foolishness in comparison to the butchering act that left an innocent child to die. The crime against the young lad is tantamount to attempted murder. Was the teenager charged for a lesser offence? Is that how light the penalty is for similar offences? So then, I can commit all sorts of atrocities against humanity and just spend a ‘holiday’ in a penal facility, and I’m good?

I am not calling for an ‘eye for an eye’, but make the teenager live to regret what he did. He should be fined and confined. The family should pay restitution to the boy’s family and when the convicted teenager reaches adulthood, he needs to work the rest of his life to take care of this child, whose life he has robbed.

I am not privy to certain details of the case and so I will estimate intelligently. My guess is that the plaintiff did not have legal counsel. How could the judge not be insightful enough to grant restitution to the poor boy, who will not get to live a normal life?

I hope the family will sue for damages at the appropriate time. They need a good lawyer.

MARIE HENRY

Clarendon