Court of Public Opinion?

"Let’s send the Altantuya murderers to hell", Raja Petra posted on Malaysia Today on 25th April 2008. One of the discussions was to leave the decision to the members of the public. He is saying that, the only court that matters is the so-called Court of Public Opinion (COPO) and wrote:

"But there are opinions and there are opinions -- and, just like assholes, no two are alike. So, while we value the expert opinions of our ‘learned’ legal eagles (yes, that is what they call each other in court even though they may be arguing -- how civil), we too have conducted our own trial by court of public opinion and we have already arrived at our verdict even while the Altantuya murder trial is halfway through and long before we can see the end of what many consider a show-trial in a kangaroo court."

Public opinion supplements the making of the law of the land. The writer in the first place preaches freedom and then the right of the people. The judiciary is a medium to set things right by certain appointed people of certain intelligence and stature. It is seen to represent the people in certain ways in the name of justice.

Public opinion in the ordinary sways from the relevant point altogether. Allegations and accusation are obviously being delivered as an end to the gather of public opinion. This departs from the recognized principles. First would be, A PERSON IS INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. Then comes this, that there is always the RIGHT TO BE HEARD.

Of course FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION has a part in this. But if this COPO is leaning on the blogs and the bloggers, credibility can be much criticised of suspicion and doubt.