"If the judges interpret the laws themselves, and suffer none else to interpret, they may easily make, of the laws, [a shredded] shipman's hose!" - King James I of England, around 1616.

“No class of the community ought to be allowed freer scope in the expression or publication of opinions as to the capacity, impartiality or integrity of judges than members of the bar. They have the best opportunities of observing and forming a correct judgment. They are in constant attendance on the courts. Hundreds of those who are called on to vote never enter a court-house, or if they do, it is only at intervals as jurors, witnesses or parties. To say that an attorney can only act or speak on this subject under liability to be called to account and to be deprived of his profession and livelihood by the very judge or judges whom he may consider it his duty to attack and expose, is a position too monstrous to be entertained for a moment under our present system,” Justice Sharwood in Ex Parte Steinman and Hensel, 95 Pa 220, 238-39 (1880).

“This case illustrates to me the serious consequences to the Bar itself of not affording the full protections of the First Amendment to its applicants for admission. For this record shows that [the rejected attorney candidate] has many of the qualities that are needed in the American Bar. It shows not only that [the rejected attorney candidate] has followed a high moral, ethical and patriotic course in all of the activities of his life, but also that he combines these more common virtues with the uncommon virtue of courage to stand by his principles at any cost.

It is such men as these who have most greatly honored the profession of the law. The legal profession will lose much of its nobility and its glory if it is not constantly replenished with lawyers like these. To force the Bar to become a group of thoroughly orthodox, time-serving, government-fearing individuals is to humiliate and degrade it.” In Re Anastaplo, 18 Ill. 2d 182, 163 N.E.2d 429 (1959), cert. granted, 362 U.S. 968 (1960), affirmed over strong dissent, 366 U.S. 82 (1961), Justice Black, Chief Justice Douglas and Justice Brennan, dissenting.

" I do not believe that the practice of law is a "privilege" which empowers Government to deny lawyers their constitutional rights. The mere fact that a lawyer has important responsibilities in society does not require or even permit the State to deprive him of those protections of freedom set out in the Bill of Rights for the precise purpose of insuring the independence of the individual against the Government and those acting for the Government”. Lathrop v Donohue, 367 US 820 (1961), Justice Black, dissenting.

"The legal profession must take great care not to emulate the many occupational groups that have managed to convert licensure from a sharp weapon of public defense into blunt instrument of self-enrichment". Walter Gellhorn, "The Abuse of Occupational Licensing", University of Chicago Law Review, Volume 44 Issue 1, September of 1976.

“Because the law requires that judges no matter how corrupt, who do not act in the clear absence of jurisdiction while performing a judicial act, are immune from suit, former Judge Ciavarella will escape liability for the vast majority of his conduct in this action. This is, to be sure, against the popular will, but it is the very oath which he is alleged to have so indecently, cavalierly, baselessly and willfully violated for personal gain that requires this Court to find him immune from suit”, District Judge A. Richard Caputo in H.T., et al, v. Ciavarella, Jr, et al, Case No. 3:09-cv-00286-ARC in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Document 336, page 18, November 20, 2009. This is about judges who were sentencing kids to juvenile detention for kickbacks.

Tuesday, June 21, 2016

The death penalty - handled by opportunists, sadists and people with mood disorders. Enough?

I wrote on this blog about a Georgia prosecutor "enthralled with the death penalty" (not my words, it is the words of public defenders in a pleading) that she keeps a battery-operated "toy" electric chair in her office.

That indicates clear sadistic tendencies, and a complete unfitness for the position of a public prosecutor who must not only get convictions, but to be fair to criminal defendants.

I also wrote about opportunists in public office who have used, or are using the death penalty for personal gain.

People I wrote about is the former Philadelphia District Attorney and then Chief Judge of Pennsylvania Supreme Court Ronald Castille who obtained the death penalty against the victim of sexual abuse that lasted for years since he was 13, and who killed his abuser when he turned 18.  Prosecutor/Judge Castille not only obtained the conviction and death penalty by fraud, but then, when became a judge, refused to recuse from the defendant's habeas corpus petitions 4 TIMES, reinstated his death penalty in 2012 and issued a separate concurring opinion blasting federal defenders representing Terrance Williams for doing their job.

Another opportunist who is getting political capital on the death penalty is Texas Bell County DA Henry Garza.

Henry Garza is currently prosecuting Marvin Louis Guy, the person who shot a police officer as a home invader, not knowing that the armed person who was climbing into his window at night during an unannounced was a police officer.

At the same time, Henry Garza is running for his 5th term as Bell County DA, a position that currently pays $140,000 a year, and is the Chairman and former President of the National District Attorneys' Association.

Henry Garza is capitalizing not only on seeking the death of an innocent person who exercised his right to self-defense in his own home, but, by doing that and not prosecuting those who have sent the police officer to his sure death, he is making sure that similar - completely unnecessary - raids against pot-growers will happen in the future, and will cost more lives to police officers, more lives to criminal defendants, and millions of dollars to taxpayers.

Now there is also a report that the Dallas County DA (Texas, a death penalty state) suffered a THIRD mental health setback and was hospitalized into a psychiatric hospital.

The DA was hospitalized a month ago for depression, now she is hospitalized for "mood disorders".

A person who needs repeated psychiatric hospitalizations, especially those for "mood disorders", has an unlimited discretion to seek death penalty against people?

But - you know what is most interesting?

The news reports says that the reporters allegedly spoke to "mood-disordered" DA's potential opponents in a re-election, and the opponents said that they will NOT make the issue of the DA's mental condition "an issue" in their election campaign.


Does political correctness trump people's RIGHT TO LIFE?

And, is it possible that the Dallas DA's mood swings and/or depression are the direct results of the responsibility that humans should not have, to "play God" and hold decisions to seek a government-controlled murder against other people.

A lot is being said about why the death penalty should be abolished.

About mistakes, racism, ineffective assistance of counsel, police and prosecutorial misconduct.

Yet, more and more comes to light as to personalities of prosecutors:

  • sadists;
  • political opportunists using the death penalty for personal gain, for the advancement of their career;
  • mentally ill individuals with mood swings.
Such people should not handle life-and-death decisions.

Yet, with the "mood-disorder" DA, the issue of her mental illness came to life only because she needed to be away from the office, she needed repeated hospitalizations.

That means that, for a while, she was handling her mental illness issues on the job, possibly while handling death penalty cases.

Opportunists can be figured out through conflicts of interest, sometimes years later.

Prosecutors with mental health issues, from sadism to mood disorders, may never be figured out because, short of hospitalization, their records are private. 

The only "safe" way to deal with it is to abolish the death penalty.

Otherwise, you may be allowing a secret psychopathic sadist during one of his/her mood swings to make the decision to seek or not to seek the death penalty.

And - when people's lives are at stake, political correctness should be damned and prosecutors' mental health issues should be made the front and center issues in whether to remove such a prosecutor by any means - public demand for resignation, impeachment, discipline or reelection.

And the same refers to opportunist prosecutors.

No comments:

Post a Comment