<p><a href="http://thedartmouth.com/2014/05/16/featured/dear-dartmouth-thank-you-3">http://thedartmouth.com/2014/05/16/featured/dear-dartmouth-thank-you-3</a> </p>
<p>Look at the Parker Gilbert case for an example of how likely a case is to result in a guilty verdict in the court system, unfortunately. </p>
<p>Consolation: From my perspective, the court system worked exactly the way it is supposed to. There is no “unfortunately” unless you want to question the basic premises of our constitutional system of trial by jury. The jurors heard the witnesses. They reached a decision that the defendant’s guilt was not proved beyond a reasonable doubt. </p>
<p>From what I have read of the statements by the jurors and so forth, it seems clear that their opinions were highly colored by societal prejudices and false assumptions about the expected behavior of rape victims, amongst other things. Which is why I say “unfortunately.” But it is what it is.</p>
<p>From what I have read in the very detailed accounts of the testimony at the trial, the prosecution had a very weak case, and after-the-fact comments by jurors do not impeach the verdict. You and I will have to agree to disagree if you continue to think the judicial system failed in this instance, </p>
<p>I completely agree with Consolation. Justice was not served. We have a long way to go. Parker Gilbert was seen on campus talking to his Rugby coach shortly after the verdict. The victim left the school. Many assume he will be back and on the team. This sends a chilling message to rape victims. I know some of what happened behind the scenes. My daughter and her friends were devastated by this outcome. I know you are a caring parent of a Dartmouth student, About the Same, but so are the rest of us. I would appreciate it if you would be respectful of that. </p>
<p>I do not believe I said anything disrespectful. If it came across that way, I apologize. But, I evidently have a different view of and more respect for the judicial system and the jury system than others appear to have. Do I think Gilbert belongs back at Dartmouth? No. But, that’s a different question from whether justice was served. If you think justice has to mean a case coming out the way you thought it should, well, justice is not going to be served many more times than you think. Finally, you were not in the jury box. Neither was I. Regards. </p>
<p>To give an extreme example, in the fictional rape case in To Kill a Mockingbird, they went through a jury trial. Do you think justice was served there? I think not. Unfortunately, the verdicts rendered by juries in some kinds of cases reflects eons of prejudice and lack of understanding. Rape cases are notorious for this. </p>
<p>I do think that you are inadvertently trivializing this concern by making statements about only having things come out the way one wants and suggesting that questioning a jury verdict is tantamount to throwing the Constitution in the wastebasket. :)</p>
<p>Consolation: To compare the proceedings in the Gilbert case to the racially-biased proceedings in To Kill a Mockingbird is nonsense, and I’m sure you know that. I will agree with you that rape cases (and child sexual molestation cases and spousal abuse cases) are ripe for misunderstanding of the reactions and behavior of the victims. [If expert testimony about the reactions of rape victims was not presented in the Gilbert case, I blame the prosecutor – not the jurors or the justice system.] I will not agree that I am trivializing anyone’s concerns when I take the position that 12 rational jurors could have come to the verdict they reached. The burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt is a very high standard. And, it can be a particularly hard standard to reach in cases like this one. I feel as though you are denigrating the jurors, who had a very difficult job. I will understand if you do not see it that way. </p>
<p>It was not my intention to literally compare a fictional case to this one, only to illustrate that completing a jury trial is no guarantee of “justice” done in some cases.</p>