Number of words: 286
Under an older and today much weakend view of the nature of law, each such question had a “right” and a “wrong” answer; the “right law” was somehow there, to be discovered or found by the correct use of technical reasoning. Among some lawyers and among some other people, this is still the prevalent view – more often assumed than expressed. If it is the correct view, then the workings of the capital punishment system are connected in a simple way with the decision of questions of law. Because if there
This never philosophy of law goes on to say that, where the technical materials do not produce a clear answer – a condition often evidenced by disagreement as to the answer among equally competent and disinterested people – then obviousaly since an answer is given, something else produces it. This something else may be the judge’s sense of policy, justice fairness. This is undoubtedly the usual case, in overwhelming preponderance. The judge may, in obedience to the style of our law, conceal the operation of these factors from the public or, quite often, from himself, but they must be there, or disagreement on questions of law.
But all this costs money- lots of money. So does everything else I am about to describe. I think I could just barely raise enough money for something like a fairly adequate defense – though this would utterly ruin me because adequate investigation and good legal counsel come very, very high. But it is allout of the reach of the poor. The poor man – unless some public-interest organisation happens to see an important issue in his case – can no more afford a really adequate.
Excerpted from “Capital Punishment” by Charles Black Jr.