Why is it better that the guilty escape than that the innocent suffer?

1. WHAT HE SAID (the record)

Record ledger

• BELIEF (undated): William Blackstone believed it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer. This belief is grounded in the principle of caution in admitting presumptive evidence of felony, as stated in the passage. (key quote above) [1]
• BELIEF (undated): William Blackstone believed that it is better that the guilty escape than that the innocent suffer because the suffering of the innocent is past and irrevocable, while that of the guilty is future, contingent, and liable to be escaped or evaded. He argued that punishment should rather exceed than equal the injury to avoid making the guilty suffer no more than the innocent has done before them. (key quote above) [2]
• BELIEF (undated): William Blackstone believed it is better that the guilty escape than that the innocent suffer, because he argued that an officer cannot be punished for allowing an escape until the original delinquent has been convicted, to avoid punishing an innocent person. "But, before the conviction of the principal party, the officer thus neglecting his duty may be fined and imprisoned for a misdemeanour." [3]
• ACTION (editor's note) (undated; editor's note, not his words): The editor notes that William Blackstone did not write this passage, but the passage reflects views that were later found to be sanctioned by authorities such as Cicero and Panætius. The passage was written by someone else and was not authored by William Blackstone. "When this note was written, the editor was not aware that the general observations contained in it were sanctioned by so great authorities as Cicero and Panætius." [4]
• ACTION (editor's note) (undated; editor's note, not his words): The editor reports that there is no modern authority to induce us to think that perjury is murder by the law of England, and that Lord Coke says expressly, 'it is not holden for murder at this day.' "there is no modern authority to induce us to think that it is murder by the law of England: lord Coke says expressly, 'it is not holden for murder at this day.'" [5]

What cuts against it

• Nothing in the retrieved passages cuts against the answer beyond the ledger entries above.

2. HOW IT APPLIES (reasoning; inference is marked)

1. William Blackstone believed it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer. This belief is grounded in the principle of caution in admitting presumptive evidence of felony. [1]

2. He argued that the suffering of the innocent is past and irrevocable, while that of the guilty is future, contingent, and liable to be escaped or evaded. [2]

3. Therefore, punishment should rather exceed than equal the injury to avoid making the guilty suffer no more than the innocent has done before them. [2]

4. This principle is reflected in the rules laid down by Sir Matthew Hale, which emphasize the need for caution in convicting individuals for crimes without sufficient evidence. [1]

5. The editor notes that the views expressed in some passages were later found to be sanctioned by authorities such as Cicero and Panætius, indicating that these principles were not unique to Blackstone but were part of a broader legal tradition. [4] (Inference)

3. HIS TAKE

Record coverage: DIRECT

William Blackstone directly addressed the question of why it is better that the guilty escape than that the innocent suffer. He believed that the law should prioritize the protection of the innocent over the conviction of the guilty, as the suffering of the innocent is past and irrevocable, while that of the guilty is future, contingent, and liable to be escaped or evaded. This principle is reflected in the rules laid down by Sir Matthew Hale, which emphasize the need for caution in convicting individuals for crimes without sufficient evidence.

Extrapolation: William Blackstone believed that the law should prioritize the protection of the innocent over the conviction of the guilty, as the suffering of the innocent is past and irrevocable, while that of the guilty is future, contingent, and liable to be escaped or evaded.

Competing readings: There are no competing readings in the record, as the passages directly support the belief that the law should prioritize the protection of the innocent over the conviction of the guilty.

Confidence: High, as the passages directly address the question and provide clear reasoning for the belief.