No, Society the Judge, the Jury and the Verdict
Laura Somebody Vs The Public Court 2016
In the above mentioned case, The Plaintiff (a young Kenyan Female) brought forward to the social Media Public court a case against the Defendant (an adult male employed at a Telco) in which the Plaintiff provided electronic evidence of screenshots for a whats up chat between her and the defendant. In the case brought forward, the Defendant is accused of having picked the defendant’s mobile number from a record sheet she filled out at a Telco outlet where she had gone to seek service. The accused is stated as having gone ahead and instigated communication with the accuser in what the accuser terms as intruding of personal privacy. This case is only presented from the accuser’s point of view since the accused did not appear in the public domain to stand trial but the mass court however proceeded with the case at is.
If you are ever online or best put, if you are ever on social media, then perhaps you happened to come across the above scenario. Every Dick, Tom and Jerry had at least an opinion to throw in here and there in the publicly served case. And the case was heard, tried, judged and ruled all in the public glare.
Talking of opinions, some people said Laura went too far in choosing to publish private chats between her and the accused. Some said she was right for it was the only available alternative for her to pursue. Yet still a fair majority thought she was neither right nor wrong. Those in support of her decision were for the idea that it serves right to curb the mushrooming “Mafisi” culture among the majority Kenyan Men. For the longest time possible the case above took a dramatic turn to reading as to whether Laura was right or wrong in taking the “Bold” action? Leaving out the accused who by starting the conversation with Laura had sent her his picture at the job station followed by a hushed introduction then went straight to the Agenda. This is as per the captured Wats Up screenshots. Just to cut the long story short, the accused admittedly stated that the accuser was hot (as per his own undisclosed SI unit) and that he wanted to date her.
So the trial went wild and viral. Some called Laura Names. Others said she was all but looking for cheap publicity. Yet more others thought she went too far by choosing to take the bull by the horns. It’s surprising that others brought a new twist to the trial stating that by her displaying the accused details publicly, she had too intruded her privacy. This one read like it was destined to turn the case upside down once and for all. So who should be the accused and who should be the accuser dear my learned friends.
Someone wrote “She has just rejected that guy because he doesn’t have means and well (according to her own gauge) he doesn’t have the looks” According to this anonymous investigator, the narrative would have changed to end happily there after just like in the movies had our accused been of those to die for TV looks. But who told madam Anonymous that Laura was looking for a Mr. To die for model? Chances are perhaps Laura was not just interested in dating anyone. Anyone. Be it the guy stalking him or the fictious Mr. To die for looks. I said before this case shifted totally from that Mr. Accused to wholeheartedly about Laura. So society decided that some people should just go scot free while others roast as sacrificial lambs! What happened to the good old days when people carried their own crosses?
The case was tried and awarded within the periphery of the Public court at the Social media Supreme Court. The Telco Company went ahead to post on social media a hushed apology for Laura underlined with a promise to deal with the Culprit appropriately and for them, rather for us that was home and dry. Then it broke open the big question of how vulnerable what we call our private space is.
In that whole twist of discussing Laura’s Case and in the line of how confidential is our personal information with regards to dealing with businesses and or public or private companies, someone brought up a story of a bank related case. In the said narrative, customer X lost their bag that happened to contain personal stuff with bank Cards included. Person Y practicing good citizenry picked the documents and having noted the bank card reached out to the bank to explain the scenario. Bank Z in response acted quick to give person Y mobile numbers for Customer X to reach out to her over the rescued documents. Good thing sounds so. The bank was to instead take over from there instead of sharing customer data erroneously. Person Y calls Customer X, they meet up and she picks her documents between tears of Joy. She asks to reward Person X but he’s among the few gentlemen remaining. He responds with a resounding NO to the offer. It doesn’t stop there. Months later Person Y starts stalking Customer X asking for her hand in marriage. Reads like scratch my back I scratch yours. Alas! Customer X feels tormented and as last resolve resorts to changing personal address and her contact information. Think about that.
Back to our judging story and indeed Society turns out to be the Judge, the Jury and the verdict all rolled up into one! You too you are a victim of this judging Gorgy. Me too can’t deny (rolls eyes) But unlike you, am working around calling it quits with life. So God of Abraham have Mercy on me. Please send Angel Gabby to rain down on me that I judge no more! Promise.
Yes, it is every day we judge. We judge and we are judged without knowing. No, we know but we think it’s still cool to judge others yet by double standards we think we should not be judged; wrong thing that is good people. Why and how? You ask. Okay around the corner we meet some shabby youths pulling a cart from Marikiti loaded with fruits that form our smoothies at Galitos. Do you notice how we are first to judge them that they are shabby? Then we conclude they are shabby because they don’t have money. They don’t have money because their work is hard labour manual work. Their work is hard labour manual work because they refused to go to school and now they are paying for their choices. So this “choices have consequences’” phrase is not just going away two electioneering terms in tow? Unknown to us is the fact that perhaps these guys are leaving their dreams. They are happy doing what they are doing. For them, it’s a lifestyle. It’s all they ever wanted to be when they grew up.
They say first impression is lasting impression. This first impression they proceed to say, its recorded within the first ten seconds of meeting someone for the very first time. Strange how that happens faster than the speed of light; light that powers the whole world day and even makes us see those people we are bound to judge. So we think they are well dressed and healthy and that translates to them having means (read money) Them having money sounds like affords them a loving close knit family and loads of friends and that’s why they are glowing happy. They are glowing happy and that means there lives are in straight order. Their lives are in straight order and that might mean they give a lot to charity and hence they have a great relationship with God. Damn.
Probably on the first meeting they were sad, beaten and unkempt. That should mean life is really beating them down. Life is beating them down because they weren’t as serious at school. They weren’t serious at school and thus they will not add to anything much in life. They will not add to anything much in life might mean they are a nuisance to the public. The idea that they might be a nuisance to the public might mean perhaps they might still from you or better still they are about to borrow something from you!