Blackstone's ratio states that it's better that ten guilty persons escape than one innocent suffer. To me, if you don't believe this or, as Ben Franklin did and I do, you really can't claim to be an advocate for criminal justice reform. If over the last year you've complained about trials not being even playing fields, you can't call yourself an advocate for criminal justice reform. If your more angry because a person who you perceive to be guilty was acquitted than you are that an innocent man was executed, you can't call yourself an advocate for criminal justice reform.
Rittenhouse is clearly innocent. A lot of you believe that he's not and are still irate that he was acquitted. Most of you don't know who Ledell Lee was, a man who was executed for a murder that he likely didn't commit. If your priorities were in order, you would be angrier about Ledell Lee's execution. If your priorities were in order, it's Lee's execution that would have sparked massive protests. If your priorities were in order, you would see that there's a much bigger issue of innocent people spending decades on death row in this country than there is a problem of guilty people getting off.
Even if I thought that Rittenhouse were guilty, which I don't, I would take ten of him, I would take ten OK Simpsons, I would take ten Travis McMichaels and gladly see them go free to save one Leedell Lee.
