Can we lay off the "eye for an eye" stuff and all that biblical mumbo-jumbo when referring to the judicial process, please?
If we are to take the injunctions of the Judaeo-Christian bible to heart, then we'd still be stoning homosexuals, adulterers and men who cut their beards (still, if Ann Widdecombe gets her way, maybe we'll be doing it again soon).
And, in its original context, the "eye for an eye"
injunction was a warning against going over the top - in other words, keep things in proportion and don't over-react. (and yes, I know there are some who would say: "In that case, what's wrong with a life for a life?" Plenty, I say).