Ticker Headline

[talon]

I saw this headline on a ticker, so couldn't get details at the time, but the headline stuck with me anyway.

It read, "Did [removed because it's irrelevant, but it involved violence of one individual against another individual] trial serve public interest?"

Since when are trials against individuals on behalf of individual victims supposed to serve the public interest? All my life, I've been under the impression that such court cases were between the individuals - the harmed and the harmer. These trials aren't supposed to "serve the public interest" because "the public" isn't involved. There may be family members, local community members interested in it and concerned about the outcome, but it's not usually a thing for "the public" -people who are far away and not involved

Landmark cases are a different kettle of fish, but the day-to-day wrongs and redresses are personal, not public.

I think this is something we all need to be aware of - forcing private acts to be public ones, making the individual be relevant to the general, and conflating the individual with the group.

So, no, whatever the trial was about, it certainly didn't serve the public interest because it wasn't supposed to.