According to the textbook, this would be an inaccurate assumption because Islam has set strict guidelines for committing a crime like murder, whereas crimes like theft or drinking are considered serious too, but the punishments set for them are not as serious as that of a murder. There are some cases where the crime of theft goes unpunished, however in case of a Qisas crime the person accused for the crime is entirely dependent upon the decision taken by the family of the victim (Chankseliani, 2012). The relatives of the victim has three options at their disposal, they can either let go of the killer and pardon him for the act of insanity, they can opt to receive compensation in monetary terms for the blood lost, or they may request for retribution. However, in case of Hudud crimes a person does not end up losing his life, but only receives punishment which involves cutting of hands or fingers (Al-Kashif, 2009). Under Qisas crime, the murderer has the potential to be punished such that his life may be taken away.
According to Pizzi's soccer vs. football analogy (2000), it states that the European soccer has lesser restrictions, and even though its field are bigger than that of American football, it is governed by lesser referees and the rules and regulations are far lesser compared to American football which needs close governance by a large number of referees. Thus, similarly in the European there are only a few numbers of rules of evidence, as it follows an adversarial system where the person accused is considered to be innocent until he/she is considered guilty. However, American trials are utterly complex and follow inquisitorial system where the accused is considered to be guilty until he/she can be proved innocent.