On Public Demand, previous blog !!

Monday, June 30, 2008
Neutral - Were you??
I was wondering if anyone has read the novel by John Grisham – THE RUNAWAY JURY. In the book, there is a character by the name “Nicholas Easter”. He was one of the jurors, biased towards a particular party. And at the end of the courtroom drama, he was successfully able to influence all jurors. In fact, he even gets one or two jurors removed during the trial.
For those who are not that lucky to have seen some amazing court room movies about law cases in US, let me give you some gyaan.
There is a judge who conducts the proceeding in an impartial manner and the decision making authority is a set of jurors who are randomly chosen and are unbiased. They are sequestered during the course of the trial so that no one is able to influence their decision making ability.
There were few things that happened yesterday that reminds me of the book.
Who were the jurors yesterday? Who was the judge? I suppose, the student council was playing the role of the judge and we, as a batch, were the so-called jurors. Were the judges impartial, neutral and unbiased? Were the jurors, especially a few, impartial? If not, then were they able to influence everyone?
What was the point of yesterdays open house? To find who was at fault? Or to decide on a course of action for the five unfortunate students? (one of them was my mentee and I was unaware that he was implicated. But that’s for a later day!! ) If it was the first one, was the decision made by hearing both the aggrieved parties (No, Saurabh Jain, not you) in an impartial manner? How can you judge someone’s action by such a background? Why were someone more vocal than others? Why were their questions not clarifications but accusations? Is it ok if everyone gangs up on a particular individual? And then after the open house why were they so worried about the aftermath of the open house? Did anyone think about the ramifications during the open house? Was the council able to handle the open house in proper decorum?
If it was the second one, then I am happy to know that all five have been acquitted of their charge. Can the students council come out with an official version of what happened?
We spoke about people, whether they should be more responsible if they are holders of position in responsibility (not sure about power), but did that happen yesterday by people on the stage? Were they not supposed to be impartial and not dramatize the proceedings.
These are my views and standard disclaimers apply !!
Adding one more disclaimer - I am not biased. I sympathize with all three aggrieved parties.