Justice delayed is justice denied. This should apply to the case of Dennis Dechaine.
Even if the chances were infinitesimally small that Dechaine was wrongly convicted, there are enough recurring and sobering reminders that the judicial system should not be allowed to claim infallibility.
Those responsible for repeatedly and pre-emptively denying a plausible review of a questionable and possibly compromised case should face up to the (ever-so-remote?) possibility of having committed a miscarriage of justice.
Being more interested in avoiding embarrassment than seeing justice prevail should bar those responsible from being part of a review process because of conflict of interest.
There should be a preponderance of interest in protecting the integrity of the judiciary than camouflaging its shortcomings.
Howard N. Stewart
Manchester
Send questions/comments to the editors.
-
OpinionToday’s editorial cartoon
-
Letters to the Editor
UMF cuts part of suppression of humanities
-
Editorials
Our View: ‘Great replacement’ lie runs deep in Republican politics
-
Columnists
Maine Bishop Deeley: Women’s Health Protection Act curtails religious freedom
-
Things to Do
Jody and Boys to perform Music for Mavis concert
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have one? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login to participate in the conversation. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.