Does the punishment fit the crime? What do you think? In most casesI think it doesn't. Even when a crime is committed, at times all evidence cannot be admitted, how dumb is that. Evidence is evidence in my mind. Yes I do believe there shouldn't be any reasonable doubt, but present the whole case not just some parts. How can I make a educated decision if all evidence isn't presented. The judiscial system is screwed up, and when some one is convicted and the evidence is so overwhelmingly against the defendant. I say hang'em high, don't try to reabilitate them don't incarcerate them at the taxpayer expense, do them in or punish them in a way so the victim can have some personal satisfaction. The best deterrent to crime is to scare the bejesus out of someone to make them think twice about what they're doing and what the consequences would be. Make sure that there are consequences too. I don't want any tree hugging judge on the bench that will not stand up for common sense or what's right. Most of the judges get appointed and they're there for life for the most part and do not have to answer for their decisions. The lay person always has to be accountable for their actions and so should people on the bench. These people are not above the law just because they preside over cases. To many of our judiscial post go to pawns of the legislature, and it's sad because it's politics that gets any judge a post. Who you know not how you judge, there's a crime for you.