Tuesday, March 06, 2007

Democrats and Justice

Well, now it's official.

A Republican accused of a crime can expect Justice from a D.C. jury in 2007, to about the same degree a black man accused of a crime in Alabama could expect Justice in 1907.

3 comments:

Marcus said...

You know what DJ, i was thinking the same thing. I do not know why Scooter's defense team did not try to get the trial moved to South Dakota.

Dan said...

Now you're disparaging the justice system because your man committed a crime? How delusional are you?

The jury even managed to find him not guilty on one count - they obviously did their civic duty thoughtfully and well. How dare you, who did NOT hear the evidence, who did NOT watch the witnesses on the stand, who did NOT hear the instructions given by the judge, attack the work of these jurors?

DJ Drummond said...

I heard what the judge (who "redfined" the definition of Reasonable Doubt) and several jurors (who expressed vicious hatred for the Bush Administration, confirming a predisposition against the presumption of Libby's innocence) said.

I also observed early on that the purview of Fitzgerald's authority did not extend to pressing charges not related to the question of whether someone exposed Valerie Plame to physical danger by revealing her status as a CIA employee. Since the evidence revealed in the trial to the public demonstrated that she and her husband (the thorough execrable Joe Wilson) were directly responsible for the public knowledge of her work at the CIA, and the plain fact that she was never a "covert" agent as she claimed, by the terms of the law enacted Fitzgerald exceeded his authority to pursue charges for no more than political malevolence against Libby.

Libby is plainly innocent, but in D.C. that does not matter.