Revenge, setting an example overriding motives in sentence
In our democracy, law is enacted by the legislative branch of government, with the penalty for violating that law determined within its context.
The judicial branch of government tests that law for constitutionality, and determines its compliance, but it does not alter the intent nor application of that law.
Judges do interpret law in consideration of circumstantial justice, and that is why judges are charged with deciding the outcome at trial.
In the case of the sentencing of Nicholas Abarcar to five years in prison for killing another motorist in a horrifying auto collision by Kona Circuit Court Judge Robert D.S. Kim (West Hawaii Today, May 18) it would seem that revenge, and setting an example, were the overriding motives in determining the penalty imposed. No one would dispute the horror of the circumstances of that auto crash, nor should they deny the anger expressed in the grief experienced by the family and friends of the victim.
What has happened in this case is that Kim sentenced the defendant for a crime he did not commit, murder.
The actual crime committed by Abarcar was inattention to driving, the penalty for which, clearly expressed within the law, is a monetary fine. Unquestionably, the consequences of that crime were horrifying. However, what happened was not intended and intent is the measure of guilt, not circumstance.
Kim’s expression of revenge is the expected human response to an act as devastating as this was, but the consequence of granting the call for vengeance is that the judge has denied hope for closure for the victim’s family in that they will eventually need an opportunity to express forgiveness in order to obtain that closure, which they no longer have. Furthermore, interpreting justice as a tool to impose an example upon others who may fiddle with their cellphones while driving, is placing the definition of justice in compliance with the law in jeopardy for all of us, and certainly contrary to what a constitutional democracy requires of its judges.
Kelly Greenwell
North Kona
^
People should want to be working for their income
It’s a shame that some folks are using the pandemic to no longer go back to work. No matter what, now that most have gotten vaccinated, there really is no excuse for not going back to work. Even if many are getting handouts from the government, that is no way to live. People should want to be working for their income, not only accepting government handouts like welfare recipients. I hope our government is not making our citizens into a country of welfare cases.
Colleen Miyose-Wallis
Kailua-Kona
^
Take care of each other
It is amazing to me that some people (Republicans?) who see much-needed relief being distributed, immediately judge others to be lazy. In reality, there are a small number in any demographic, liberal or conservative alike, who will take advantage of the system, but they are not the majority. In reality, we should be taking care of each other, in small ways and in big ways. If a person has hope and is not fearful of their fellow man, they can reach their full potential. History, and study after study, have corroborated this.
Why would you judge others so harshly? Are you reflecting your own tendencies? It might be really helpful to take a good look at yourself.
Carol Williams
Captain Cook
Letters policy
Letters to the editor should be 300 words or less and will be edited for style and grammar. Longer viewpoint guest columns may not exceed 800 words. Submit online at www.westhawaiitoday.com/?p=118321, via email to letters@westhawaiitoday.com or address them to:
Editor
West Hawaii Today
PO Box 789
Kailua-Kona, HI 96745