The Irony in Judgement

Posted on 04 Nov 2017 @ 4:17am by Edward Bauer

470 words; about a 2 minute read

The following is the personal log of Vice Admiral Alexandra Vance, Senior Judiciary of the Office of the Judge Advocate General. Prior to making this personal entry, it should be noted for the record that the opinions expressed herein do not represent those of the Office of the Judge Advocate General. As a senior judiciary, it is my duty in the execution of my duties to remove all personal feelings and bias from my rulings. As a member of the judiciary corps, the inclusion of one's self into judgement effectively undermines the ideals of the justice system. The evidence as proper interpretation of the law shall be the only deciding factors in a case.

How ironic is must be, when one's mirror self is placed on trial....

It is easy for those who have never been to judge those who have. The desk jockey vs the war veteran is a cliche long overused in our system. The high ranking Admiral always serving as the enemy to the hero he is she is forced to prosecute. I am no desk jockey, but I am not entirely certain Lirha Saalm is no hero. As much as starfleet preaches originally, they so quickly condemn it when it does not fit their mold. Kirk was the first to fit this description, now a celebrated hero, but at one time thought as a reckless leader.

As I sat at the bench before the court, I could not help but see myself in her. In a form of twisted irony, I, the once renegade command officer was being forced to place judgement upon someone who I personally believe did 'the best they could'. While the law keeps us from delving into a tailspin of savagery, it is not perfect and it does not always adapt to the circumstances placed before a Commanding Officer. What Lirha Saalm did was no different then the numerous times I was placed under a cover. What she did was no different then when an Intelligence Officer becomes compromised and is forced to destroy any information they carry. As I ponder the evidence, I am left to wonder what could have been done different.

Conversely, the law is not asking that question. The law works on precedence not what-if's. The law does not want my feelings, it yearns for my rationale.

That doesn't make the decision any easier. I cannot help but replay in my mind Saalm professing to having lost everything. What she doesn't realize is she has not lost everything. Her family and friends will stand by her, her crew will remain loyal, even if serving under a different banner.

I fear that is a luxury I no longer have. I wanted to tell her that, but that is not proper courtroom etiquette.

Life is a bitch sometimes......

End Log

RSS Feed