 |
| DIANNY |
John Green "The Constitution is our pact of civilized behavior. From it we've derived a system of institutionalized justice, which we call our criminal justice system. It's intended to include checks and balances to protect defendants from biases and ensure fair adjudication of their charges. Those safeguards include the following:
- a presumption of innocence
- a right to due process
- a right to legal defense
- a right to a trial by one's peers
- a right to trial before an impartial judge
"Given our presumption of innocence, absolute justice can't be guaranteed because conviction depends on the presence of evidence. Instead, we have agreed to accept equal treatment under the law. We agree to abide by the law in exchange for a system that treats us equally and is administered by officials who swear an oath to defend our constitutional protections.
"Then Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, and Merrick Garland came along as the country's top law enforcement officials and flushed it all. Under them, the application of justice has become decidedly unequal. Perfection was never possible, but now the claim of equal treatment has become laughable. The foundation of our legal system is being eaten away by government termites — whose lust for power far exceeds their wisdom to wield it.
"The presumption of innocence seems like a quaint idea from the past. Was New York attorney general Letitia James presuming innocence when she made a campaign promise to initiate a criminal investigation of Donald Trump before she even entered office or saw any evidence of wrongdoing? Or was she promising to operate her office using the Beria methodology? Clearly, she had her target and was promising to find the crime. Yet she faces no accountability for this flagrant violation of her oath.
"Was due process followed when the FBI destroyed evidence of Hillary Clinton's mishandling of classified documents — at Clinton's request? Did the FBI have a legal predicate when it launched an investigation of an incoming president — based on fabricated evidence provided by his political opponent? How about when they raided the homes of reporters — with armed agents — to recover Ashley Biden's diary? Had a crime even been committed?
"Is our right to competent legal representation being undermined when attorneys face disbarment for taking legal actions challenging election practices? Will this trend prevent conservative defendants from hiring competent lawyers in the future — when those lawyers fear cancellation for representing an unfavored client?
"Was a conservative from Montana tried by a jury of his peers — when that jury comprised mostly Democrats from Washington, D.C.? Was Derek Chauvin — a police officer accused of murdering a black man — tried by an impartial jury when one of his "peers" was a Black Lives Matter–supporter?". . .
No comments:
Post a Comment