The recent allegations against three suspects implicated in the kidnapping of BigBen, based on the Doctrine of Last Seen, have sparked concerns about the fairness and reliability of this presumptive principle.
As the investigation unfolds, it is crucial to scrutinize the application of this doctrine and ensure that justice is served while safeguarding the rights of the accused.
The Doctrine of Last Seen, while potentially useful in certain circumstances, has inherent limitations.
Firstly, it is a presumptive principle, not a conclusive one, and suggests that the person last seen with a missing individual may be responsible for their disappearance.
However, this doctrine does not provide definitive proof, and relying solely on it to implicate individuals is unjust.
In the absence of concrete evidence, the authorities must exercise caution to avoid miscarriages of justice.
The Doctrine of Last Seen oversimplifies the complexities of human behaviour and ignores the possibility of mere coincidence.
It is plausible that an individual was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, without any involvement in BigBen’s disappearance.
This doctrine’s failure to account for such nuances undermines its reliability and fairness.
In the context of BigBen’s case, the application of the Doctrine of Last Seen is particularly problematic.
With the case still ongoing, it is premature to point fingers at anyone. The authorities must prioritize gathering concrete evidence, rather than relying on presumptive principles.
This approach will not only ensure that justice is served but also prevent potential miscarriages of justice.
It is essential to remember that suspects are innocent until proven guilty.
The mere allegations against them should not be used to tarnish their reputations or compromise their rights.
The principles of justice demand that we uphold the presumption of innocence and ensure that the accused receive a fair trial.
As the ancient legal maxim reminds us, “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.”
This timeless principle underscores the importance of ensuring that justice is served while safeguarding the rights of the accused.
Let us uphold this fundamental principle and demand that the investigation into BigBen’s kidnapping be conducted with the utmost care, diligence, and commitment to justice.
The Doctrine of Last Seen, as applied in BigBen’s case, raises concerns about fairness, reliability, and justice.
As we move forward, it is crucial to prioritize concrete evidence, uphold the presumption of innocence, and ensure that the accused receive a fair trial.
Only then can we hope to achieve justice that is truly just.
Anything less would be a travesty.
