One of the worst prosecutors in the country, Carol Chambers of Colorado, seems hell-bent on challenging Christopher Arnt as the worst and most dishonest prosecutor in the country. Her latest caper is to charge two boys (now 11) with felony arson for a fire they accidentally set last year.
Bill Johnson of the Denver Post puts this into much-needed perspective. (Thanks to Kerwyn for finding this one.)
I'm speaking today to the Panhandle Economics Club in Pensacola, Florida. I'll be back home early tomorrow morning.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
This is what arises from collectivizing "justice." When offenses become "offenses against the State" instead of individuals, ludicrous people take the reins and render ludicrous results.
Read Bruce Benson's, The Enterprise of Justice" about this issue. Even better, read the Bible and its emphasis on making the victim whole through restitution rather than bloating a government "justice" system.
One can only hope the jury is made up of people with real brains, people not swayed by an overzealous and idiotic prosecutor's zeal to up their conviction rate and prove to the voters they're a real 'law and order person'. Yes, charging unrepentant juveniles with no remorse for their actions, juveniles who've demonstrated time after time the 'wrist slap' of juvenile courts doesn't work and these juveniles are older than 15 makes sense. Charging a 10 year old as an adult is wrong in so many ways. Come on, Carol Chambers. Prove you're just as stupid as the male prosecutors. Keep going. And then, when you face the same justice system you've created, don't cry to the American public. You and your brethern are the ones who did this.
Maybe she will have kids one day. Or if she does, maybe she can explain to them why making a childish mistake warrants having their life ruined. This will come home to roost, she doesnt know it yet though as she cant see through her zeal.
Carol Chambers likes to prosecute without using any common sense. Like another "boy" who is mentally retarded, whom they questioned for hours until he admitted the crime, opps the DNA doesn't match. This apparently is no problem for Carol, she is still taking him to trial, after all he "confessed" right?
The woman is a menace.
RE: One can only hope the jury is made up of people with real brains.
The voir dire process as currently corrupted by prosecutors and judges is used to prevent just such a jury from being empanelled.
But since members of the Justice [sic] System are doing the tampering this in NOT jury tampering.
H.L. Menken said it best:
In matters of corruption it is not the illegal things politicians do that enrage us, it is the legalized things they do that outrage us so.
Here is a transcript of voir dire from a case here in Milwaukee.
As you can see on page 22 the judge is screening out an jurors with brains who might question the porpriety of the law or the law as applied in this case (i.e nullifiers).
Does anyone have any moral, philosophical, social, or other reason that I haven't touched on, or in questions I have asked, that would somehow make you less than fair or impartial in this case?
Bill, there is an article in the Chattanoogan about a long-time grand jury foreman being dismissed for giving honest opinions about the judicial system. I thought of you when I read this. More of the "squash anyone who gets in our way" mentality.
John Washburn:
Can't you just say no to that question? Did the judge offer particular definitions for "fair" and "impartial"?
Post a Comment