How often is the truth manipulated to have the masses quietly swallow a certain version of the truth? I’ve been watching a few documentaries lately and they involve incidents of historical importance. Where there is a place online for for viewers to discuss the information at hand and also other research they may have undertaken, it seems that anyone who questions the valididty of the version of events given is deemed a conspiracy theorist. It’s very interesting to me that even once the law becomes involved, evidence is not always free from corruption. Where the evidence seems irrefutable and has withstood the legal tests required of it, there is generally no discourse about an event, other than the facts. It is when we find fault with the evidence used for convictions that problems arise. This is as it ought to be. Corruption of any form must always be exposed so that the system of law we are bound by can be upheld as right and just. There are reasons that the law of evidence exists. The rules of evidence must prevail in legal process or there can be no justice. It seems to me that no truth at law is infalliable. We’ve all heard of stories of terrible wrongs done in the name of law, or people being wrongly imprisoned, sometimes worse. This doesn’t mean that the law is of no value, it highlights instead the importance of integrity within a judicial system. The law must maintain it’s integrity to the highest degree possible and it must be held to account by the people who are bound by it. Sorry I know it’s all a bit sombre but it’s been kicking around in my mind this evening.
Unrelated, but I made a tuna pasta bake for dinner and it was so good! I was pretty pleased with myself 😉 xo.