To me, the execution of this Saudi Arabian woman seems extraordinarily unfair. The lack of lawyers or even a capable translator would have made it extremely difficult for her to defend herself. It’s interesting that such a thing could happen in Saudi Arabia, whereas in the United States, all those accused of a crime have the right to an attorney. I think that the most shocking aspect of this story is that she was executed for a crime she may have committed at the age of 17. I personally don’t believe in the death penalty at all, especially when imposed on someone who isn’t yet an adult. In the United States, juveniles cannot be tried as adults--not unlike what Saudi Arabia is supposed to do.
What do you think? Should juveniles be sentenced to death if the crime is worthy of it? If yes, what crime? Should there be a death penalty at all? Would this kind of situation be possible in other countries, specifically America? Why is the right to an attorney important? Do you think that you would see this differently if you weren’t American? How so?
Personally, I think the conditions that this woman was in were very unfair. However, concerning her age, because she is close enough to being considered an adult (I’m going to assume it is 18 there as well, though I do not know) and that she faked her age on a passport, and lives with the responsibilities of an adult, I think it would be fair to have her tried as one. And also, juveniles in America can be tried as adults, and have a number of times. If I’m correct, it is something the judge decides, based on the severity of the crime, and the criminal record of the child.
ReplyDeleteThough I do believe the death penalty is earned in some cases , I don’t believe that minors should be sentenced with the death penalty. I’m not sure of a real reason for my believing of that, but it seems wrong to not allow someone to be able to change and live their life, if they are so young. If they are older, it seems to me that they’ve already chosen a set path, and pre-determine what was going to happen in their life. Going back to this specific trial, though, the circumstances seemed very unfair. The article states how the translator that was provided to her may not have been able to adequately translate her words, which obviously is a huge barrier if you are trying to get across something specific and important. Moreover, I believe the right to have a lawyer is very important. I believe that everyone should be given a fighting chance at their argument, and obviously not everyone has the ability to present evidence and defend themselves as lawyers know how to do. If I wasn’t American, I might have different opinions, but I believe there would be a good chance I have similar ones. If anything, the right to a lawyer may be affected, because if I was from a country in which this was not common in cases or was not often provided, I may see it as less necessary. I do wonder, though, how this case would have turned out in America, with media backing up the case, and the laws we have enforced.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think that the death penalty is definitely a viable punishment in some instances. Sometimes the only correct punishment for an atrocity is death.
ReplyDeleteHowever, what irks me about this case, however, was how the trial and investigation happened. The evidence and trial that they based the execution on was flawed and completely biased. The article says that Nafeek confessed that the baby actually died by choking on a bottle. The fact that this was barely considered is absolutely ridiculous. The core of the problem in my opinion is the judicial system in countries like Saudi Arabia. The real intricacies of how Saudi Arabia's judicial system is not known to us, however we do know that they are completely corrupt and biased. Every person should get a lawyer, a fair trial, and there should be no cruel and unfair punishment.