• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • About
    • About Us
    • Volume 14 Staff
    • Past Mastheads
    • Subscriptions
    • Contact Us
    • For HLS Students
  • HLPR Blog
    • Notice and Comment
    • Write For Us
  • Online Pieces
  • Print Archive
    • Volume 14-2
    • Volume 14-1
    • Volume 13-2
    • Volume 13-1
    • Volume 12-1
    • Volume 11-2
    • Volume 11-1
    • Previous Volumes
  • Submissions

Harvard Law & Policy Review

Burglary’s Silver Lining

January 16, 2013 by ehansen

By Hudson Kingston

Last month a judge in the UK caught a fair amount of flak from everyone, up to and including the prime minister, for saying that it takes a lot of courage to commit a burglary. He received a formal reprimand, and piqued the attention of satirist David Mitchell, who said: “David Cameron said that burglars weren’t brave at all but were ‘cowards’. I don’t know how he knows that but it’s a good job because presumably, if they were braver, they’d break into loads more places.” Mitchell went on to explain that words mean something and Prime Minister Cameron made the classic mistake of assuming bad people are bad all over, and goes on: “Having established that burglary is a bad thing, he thinks linking it or its practitioners with any positive attributes, however incidental, is an idea too sophisticated for the British public to grasp.”

After reading this I tried to apply Mitchell’s ultimate thesis — “[a]t the risk of sounding like those people who go on about how the Nazis had nice uniforms, it’s worth remembering that bad things often have good aspects to them” — to other situations, and found it difficult. It is not easy to read about someone who robbed old folks in a Ponzi scheme and then tried to bribe a court 19 million dollars, on the record, to get out of it, and then think of a nice thing to say. Granted, some recent crimes have the potential to make motion picture history (especially this one), but it truly is — as Mitchell suggests — a rare skill to be able to point up exactly what was difficult or laudable in something that, on the whole society, views as evil.

The judge in question must have seen quite a few more “bad” people in his court than most of us are used to confronting in one lifetime, and that could be the source of his unexpected point of view. This debate in the UK, and the judge’s ability to see the humanity in an accused criminal, are heartening given thelopsided judiciary appointments we have seen in this country. It is nice to believe that (some) judges continue to evolve as people even after the day they were nominated. Not to be a Pollyanna, but sometimes intelligent people will surprise you, even if it may be as frequent as Halley’s Comet.

Filed Under: HLPR Blog: Notice and Comment

Primary Sidebar

Mailing List

Enter your email address to subscribe to the official HLPR mailing list!

Facebook

Facebook

Twitter

My Tweets

Tags

abortion aca affordable care act burwell v. hobby lobby campaign finance capital punishment citizens united civil rights congress contraception mandate criminal justice criminal justice reform death penalty Donald Trump education eighth amendment financial crisis first amendment food law fourteenth amendment gay marriage gay rights gun control gun violence health care HLPR Symposium hobby lobby immigration LGBT rights marriage equality obama obamacare Obama Legacy Symposium obergefell v. hodges policing President Obama religious freedom Republican rfra same sex marriage SCOTUS supreme court volume 9.1 voting rights voting rights act

Archives

Footer

Contact Us

For questions or comments, email hlpr@mail.law.harvard.edu or write to:

Harvard Law and Policy Review
1585 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02138

Copyright © 2021 · Magazine Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in