There is nothing quite as exciting as watching history in the making.
Texan Ronnie Earl, the Travis County District Attorney, jumped again into the national spotlight and secured a place in legal history when he dropped the charges against Tom Delay because the law Delay was indicted with breaking was not created until a year after the alleged conspiracy took place. Because of this blooper, he asked the Court to drop the previous count and issued new charges of conspiring to launder money and money laundering. Of course, this new action begs the question; did anyone research this charge to see if there was actually a law in place in the State of
That sounds harsh, but in light of Dan Rather’s career curtailing calamity and the equally notorious and far from factual reporting on the mayhem of Hurricane Katrina that slung mud on the federal government, (aka, the Bush Administration); one wonders if the Democratic mind has the capacity for rational thought. Now, I realize that there are a great many good Democrats on the grass roots level that have the ability to think and act intelligently. I know that they don’t resemble the national figures any more than I remind you of Hillary Clinton or Ted Kennedy. But I ask you; what is going on?
Is the left so emotionally charged and angry at the present situation that they are blinded to legal procedures and scientific discovery? I remember the consternation I felt during the
But I realized that nothing lasts for ever. I didn’t vow to move to
In the case of Tom Delay, it appears that Mr. Earl is repeating a previous blunder, (Conspiracy Theorist Indicts DeLay,) from 1993 when he tried to indicted
“Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison with allegedly misusing staff and equipment in her state treasury office for political purposes.”He realized just before the jury was selected that he didn’t have the evidence needed for a conviction and asked that the charges be dropped.
"When the case finally went to trial in February 1994, Earle, lacking the evidence to prove his charges against Hutchison, asked the judge to dismiss them before a jury could be sworn in. That would have allowed Earle to go after Hutchison again, at a later time, with the same charges. Because of the prohibition against double jeopardy, however, dropping the case after a jury was seated meant Earle would never be able to harass Hutchison with the charges again.
Judge John F. Onion, Jr., spurned Earle’s request and swore in a jury. Earle then refused to present any case. Onion ordered the jurors to acquit Hutchison, which they promptly did."
Charge them and drop them appears to be the
No comments:
Post a Comment