Friday, 14th August 2009
The Case Of Anthony Taliana
Having spent 12 years of my life at the Corradino Correctional Facility working in the field of the education and rehabilitation of persons who break the law, I cannot but state that I am very worried about the fact that it is becoming common for several citizens to take on the mantle of judge and jury and pass judgment on people who are accused of breaking the law before these are sentenced or acquitted of the charges brought against them.
A case in point is that of Anthony Taliana. Here we have a case of a person who is accused of involuntary homicide, driving in a dangerous manner when drunk, failing to stop at an accident, driving without insurance, and relapsing after being convicted for dangerous driving and fined. These are the facts, everything else is superfluous. Mr Taliana will now have to answer to these charges, the due process of law will be followed and justice will be done.
The lifestyle of the accused is nobody's business and has nothing to do with the matter in question. Likewise, the good qualities of the person killed should not enter into the equation. Let me ask a simple question : "How would those people who want to crucify Anthony Taliana have reacted had an older and more respected person done the same thing and had the person killed been somebody with a bad reputation instead of a very good one?"
I would also like to state that I consider as very unfortunate the timing and the title of the Sedqa press release of August 11, 2009 entitled "Zero tolerance to drinking and driving". Sedqa should stick to its work, which I will be the first to commend, and not issue a press release with a title which is bound to influence people in the light of the recent events associated with the Anthony Taliana case. When citizens start interfering with the course of justice as in the case of the spiteful e-mail which I also received to try and influence me against Anthony Taliana, then the very basis of our legal system will be under threat. Believe me, it is no idle matter.
RSS
Comments
Its own definition, however, is not copyrighted for the simple reason that millions use its services daily, however I would think that it would readily thank Mr. Buttigieg for the free unintentional publicity.
I can almost swear that Mr. Buttigieg never copied a movie or a CD for his personal use, of course, from his friends' paid for originals.
I know of the possibility of not only copying a recording but to also edit it in such a way as to completely alter the meaning of its content.
Judges and magistrates represent society when they sit in judgement. However, this is not to mean that lynching of any sort should be practised. One must, on the other hand, realise that society was hurt by this atrocious tragic accident and said society is desperate that justice should be done and should be seen to be done.
I have a feeling that the Taliana episode is a great eye-opener and a warning to all. In Taliana, as some columnist said, is representative of many young Maltese people who would not think twice to: drive when they are not sober; try to get away with murder, and literally, too; know that they will find childish and ignorant parents who will do anything to shield them, even when they know that they did great harm.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_assassination
While I respect your legal opinion and definition, in the legal profession, splitting hairs is sometimes what wins or loses a case. I beg to differ with your interpretation of my reference to 'character assassination'.
One definition is, "Character assassination is an attempt to tarnish a person's reputation. It may involve exaggeration or manipulation of facts to present an untrue picture of the targeted person. It is a form of defamation and can be a form of ad hominem argument."
If you had read certain comments in the affront of Mr. Taliana, you would have agreed that the above definition would classify them as such.
Let us not forget that Mr. Taliana still has to be tried, evidence presented and ultimately sentenced for his alleged wrongdoing. In the meantime, irrespective of his known traits, he should be considered innocent and not subject to prejudiced opinions.
You seem to be confusing things somewhat. Character assassination involves some very different language from the mere condemnation of a despicable act or the disapproval of an unsustainable lifestyle...
In this particular case, it is the Lifestyle and Moral Structure of the individual that is being criticised. This is especially relevant because this has unfortunately become widespread among the younger generations and anybody in his right senses would agree that this needs to be quashed.
True, the man in the street lacks the full picture and THAT is WHY we need (and pay for) the courts to collect and digest the evidence.
On whether he should actually be Punished or Lauded for his actions... Everyone is entitled to an interim opinion BUT nobody has a right (or privilege) to ACT on that opinion.
This individual should (in my opinion) receive help to change his ways. Now, whether it will be through a prison sentence or through a slap on the wrist... well THAT is ALSO the court's function and NOBODY is aspiring to supplant it!
But strangling the press or people's opinions is utterly unacceptable and unconstitutional and God forbid this had to happen in this country!
.
While acknowledging that writing a blog in any paper is a privilege and not a right, I maintain that DZM should have delved into the duties of an Editor or, in the case of a blog, its Moderator.
It is permissible to condemn a criminal or immoral act by an individual , but not the character assassination of the person involved. Editors and moderators play an important part in what appears on this and other papers but sometimes they are quick to censor certain mundane comments about well known people including politicians, while they seem to turn the blind eye to derogatory comments made about ordinary citizens.
Only a judge can administer justice, after a fair trial, not readers of a paper.
Yes true, "Innocent until Proven Guilty" but otherwise, I couldn't disagree further!
1)_This is a free country and everyone is entitled to voice an opinion publicly
2)_The combination of charges against Taliana (*if upheld*) is, frankly, quite damning!
3)_Killing any innocent, especially a highly regarded person is EXPECTED to stir an outcry
4)_The case appears quite clear-cut and leaves negligible room for a buoyant defence
5)_YET *NOBODY* is claiming that Taliana should walk into prison without a fair trial
6)_AND if Taliana is acquitted and proven innocent - Then everyone will eat his own words and Taliana's reputation will be, just as publicly, rehabilitated
7)_His lifestyle is open to critique because it epitomises the undermining of current youth
8)_It is a widespread but diseased lifestyle from which this Nation needs Disinfestation
9)_Sedqa is doing precisely what they should because this Lifestyle leads to such Crime.
10)_The spiteful email you mention (which we all seem to have received), is perhaps in bad taste, BUT it is nevertheless, ENITIRELY composed of material that Taliana himself PUBLISHED on the internet _Material which is STILL available_Material which he is clearly HAPPY about!!
11)_I am personally disgusted with the entire Saga!