Riggs Debate

The courts are being looked at as a parental figure in this case because the courts is going by what the law says but rather looking at moral standards. By allowing moral standards to be part of such a case, then we are accepting for courts to deal with cases the brought to them, to practically take the case and go by what societies moral standards are. Then what is the point on the law in the books? Why do we have law makers trying to find new law that can stop any type of crime? It is because of those laws makers that we have Elmer Palmer behind bars. It is because of the law that we are able to put Elmer in prison because of his crime. He is not being rewarded for the crime that he committed, having him behind bars is not a reward a lot. He is paying the price for the malicious act that he committed, however I do not agree that taking that altering the will that Mr. Palmer wrote before his death is the way that the justice system should go about. We are simply allowing the courts to do what they think is best even if it means altering the law as well. The courts are not altering or revoking Mr. Palmers will but also the law. The reason I say this is because the decision that was made we can see that the courts not only revoked the fact that there is no statute in the law that protects the courts from making such decision but also, the altering the law by letting moral standards come in as part of law. The decision on this case will be a precedent case to cases similar to this one further down the line. We are accepting the law to invisible in cases just like this one. We are allowing the courts to simply go with the moral standards of that year or decade. We are allowing the courts to put aside the law whenever they feel is necessary. I completely agree that Elmer Palmer should not be rewarded with for the crime that he committed, however we cannot simply put the law to the side because of the feelings that we have of not allowing Elmer receive the estate. It is unfortunate that there is no law protecting the courts from altering someones will if the heir has been murdered to receive whatever is it that the will is states that he or she should receive. However, just because it is unfortunate does not mean we should allow the courts to take matters into their own hands. Elmer Palmer is receiving the appropriate punishment for his actions. He will be in prison and will not have access to the estate that his grandfather left him. By the time that Elmer Palmer is out of prison, it will cost him more work to try to get a hold of the estate and be able to do something with it. That should be punishment enough. I believe that the next step should be, allowing the law makers see this case as an inspiration to builded a new statute that allows the courts to alter the will when such an event occurs. I want to point out something else, we cannot assume anything in such a delicate case like this. We cannot assume that Mr. Palmer would have changed his will if he knew the intention that his grandson had, and we cannot assume that the reason that the reason that Elmer Palmer killed his grandfather was because his grandfather was recently married. We can only make decision with what we have at hand. Unfortunately we do not know the reason as to why Elmer Palmer killed his grandfather but what we do know is that we cannot allow the courts to make decisions outside the laws that where written. There could have many different circumstances that could of happened in the homes or Mr. Elmer Palmer and his grandfather, for all we know Elmer"s grandfather could have agreed to this type of scenario in order for his new wife not receive any estate. This is why I strongly suggest that assuming the circumstances that could have happened in this case does not justify that the courts are revoking the law and making their own. This type of behavior from the courts should not be allowed, we should not allow the courts to put aside the laws of the law just because the courts do not want to "reward" Mr. Elmer Palmer. A person who is already receiving his punishment from the criminal courts. The decision the courts made in this case, is only showing that we are okay that the courts are making their own decisions whenever they feel is necessary.