Tag: Law

By on 1 Comment

Missouri executed Marcellus Williams despite there being evidence that he was innocent. The family of the murdered woman asked that his sentence be commuted to life in prison so there was no pressure from them for execution. The county prosecutor found issues with his case and wanted further investigation. Missouri still went ahead because Williams was found guilty by a jury of his peers.

As if a jury sentence can’t be wrong when we know that human institutions are wrong all of the time. When the sentence is death, then the state should be confident that the verdict was correct. Any information that creates doubt regarding the verdict ineeds to be investigated to ensure that execution is merited.

This is why I am not a fan of capital punishment. A wrong verdict that takes away 20 years or so of a person’s life is bad enough but if the state discovers they were wrong, then the person, at least, has his life. Death can not be undone. Missouri seemed more concerned about carrying out the sentence than ensuring that the verdict was correct.

By on

Ryan Murphy, television’s master of horror, has a new series about the Menendez Brothers who famously killed their rich parents and tried to get away with it. Then when cornered pivoted to blame their parent’s deaths on the child and sexual abuse their father meted out. Sounds like a great pot boiler to me and just up Murphy’s street.

There is, however, one big problem with Murphy’s slant of the story. Murphy speculates that the two brothers had an incestuous affair. Murphy’s shows have always been free in throwing in gratuitous sex, especially gratuitous gay sex, so this should come as no surprise. But, then, this is also a “true” story. The Menendez brothers, in fact, killed Jose and Kitty Menendez. The brothers are still alive and are claiming it is a lie.

Murphy admits it is speculation, so where does this leave the story? Well as bullshit, pure unadulterated bullshit. If this were some little detail that was needed for dramatic continuity, maybe Murphy could be forgiven. But this is a bombshell. There may have been whispers in the past about an incestuous relationship between the brothers but never any confirmation. Murphy is saying it happened

Murphy could have fictionalized the story which would have given him a lot more leeway in how the story went. There would be no need to worry about strict adherence to the facts. But that isn’t what he did. He follows the historical information regarding the case to tell his story which would lead most viewers that this is a factual depiction.

There is even a case to be made for Murphy hinting at a relationship without actually coming out and saying it happened. The audience could then do their own speculation based on the facts. The facts are still largely followed but a certain mystery is added without actually stating it is truth. It would become part of the mystery of the story.

To veer off into speculation in the middle of a historical show, particularly speculation regarding the brothers sexual practices, is highly unethical. This is a bombshell. A bombshell that there is little proof to support and which the participants deny happened. The good news, at least for Murphy and his colleagues, is the Menendez Brothers are known liars and convicted murderers. It’s like shooting fish in a barrel. Trying to give their side of the story becomes a bit more problematic. Who are you going to believe — blood thirsty killers or a reputable member of the Hollywood entertainment community?

By on

I think most conservatives will agree that Kathleen Ryan, an Oakland County Michigan judge, needs to be removed from her position. The headlines are pretty cagey about why she got canned. It sounds like she is getting the ax for racism when actually it is for sexual harassment. Her racism is just the icing on the cake and I am sure will come into play if she eludes removal for sexual harassment.

Ryan’s problem, as a judge, is that her impartiality has been impinged beyond repair. She also appears to be a bit of an idiot which I think everyone, Right, Left and Center can agree on. Most smart public figures, in this day and age, know that it is unwise to speak this way unless they absolutely know for certain the other person agrees with them because her opinions are flagrantly racist. She was bound to piss off someone sometime and she did. Ryan was talking with an employee. If nothing else, this shows an amazing lack of good sense.

She could have relayed her opinions through a coded racist cant that lets everyone know what she was thinking without exposing her to racist’s complaints. Ryan gleefully and unapologetically cuts loose with her racism. Worse still, she is unaware that what she is saying is racist which is troubling. How is she supposed to rule in a case where racism is involved, if she has an inability to identify what racism is?

By on

Amir Locke’s death has brought to light again the troubling practice of no knock warrants. https://www.startribune.com/amir-lockes-killing-prompts-new-scrutiny-of-states-no-knock-warrant-laws/600144103/

I am finding it difficult to understand why such a practice is much of an advantage to the cops. In fact, no knock warrants seems like an inherently dangerous practice for all parties involved. When police barge into a person’s home in a country where a significant portion of the population has a gun, the situation is rife for overreaction. Police are nervous to begin with. A no knock warrant is being used for a reason. The cops anticipate a potential difficult situation and hope to avoid that outcome by not knocking. I am assuming that one of the situations they are worried about is potential violence. But what is the reasonable reaction to having your house broken into in the middle of the night? You are waking up to chaos, people screaming, loud noises. You don’t know who is entering your house. You might feel threatened and pull out your weapon.

From the start this is a dangerous situation, how does not knocking give the cops any advantage. Yes, the person is surprised and will have a more difficult time escaping, but when the surprised person has a loaded gun that doesn’t seem all that helpful to me. At the very least, it gives the person a moment or two to wrap their heads around the fact that they have cops at their front door and to do the right thing. If the cops think the person is dangerous or might flee, then the cops should prepare for these situations. To not give this knock is an invitation for disaster as the Amir Locke incident has proven.