Justice

     I found this post on David's blog and I thought that it was an interesting topic to comment on:

In the case of Johannes Mehserle shooting Oscar Grant at the Fruitvale Bart station back on New Year's Eve on 2008, Johannes Mehserle was only sentenced to the minimum jail time of 2 years. I thought that this case was not fair at all. Any form of murder should have resulted in at least moderate amount of time of about 8 years.

     I agree with David when he states that the sentencing Mehserle received at the end of the trial was unfair. Although I understand that there were still a lot of uncertainty, confusion, and controversy around the subject of what truly happened during the day the shooting of Grant at the Bart station took place, I do not believe that it is reasonable to only sentence Mehserle to a two year imprisonment. The reason for this belief is simple: I find that it is simply unfair for a man to lose only two years of his life and freedom in prison when he has taken away everything another individual was, is, and could have been due to a "mistake" made that could or could not have been avoided.
     In addition, the reinforcement of this sentencing is also unfair because Mehserle does not have to serve the full two years in prison. For his sentencing, the judge included the time Mehserle already spent in prison before the final decision for the sentence was made and the judge also rules in "good behavior" and "double credit" - where one day in prison is equal to two days - as factors to subtract the amount of days Mehserle has to remain in jail. I simply find this sentencing unjust; however, it is the final decision ruled by the count.
     There is a quote that states "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, and a life for a life." If this theory was followed when this case was judged, then the sentencing that would be considered fair for Mehserle is if he received the death sentence or lifetime imprisonment penalty. Maybe then would I will think the sentencing is fair.