I want to go back before the election to pull up some historical events for this analysis as part of a larger issue. Before the election, two former Nevada judges, DelVeccio and Halverson, faced charges of judicial misconduct. Just this week, Lt. Governor Kroliki informed the public that some prosecutor intended to indict him. Indictment, and even may I say conviction, does not necessarily translate into guilt. Accusations against men often translate into politically motivated efforts irrespective of evidence meant to move opinion.
Remember the Duke LaCrosse case with the stripper who alleged rape by members of the team? Not only were all of the defendants exonerated, but they also won a civil lawsuit against the District Attorney. So, when I heard that DelVeccio, indicted for sexual misconduct among other breaches of protocol, received a settlement with the dismissal of the sexual allegations, I knew that such a move was tantamount to admission on the part of the DA’s office that they’d made a mistake. Halverson, despite a pity ploy when her husband attacked her with a frying pan, lost her bid before the bar, and is now barred forever from judicial office. Personally I’m glad, since we paid her $250K/year for her entire term and she never actually heard a case to completion. Now Kroliki asserts that the pending indictment constitutes nothing more than a witch hunt meant to discredit him. I’m inclined to agree.
Whatever else these people did, it remains as ever with law enforcement to gather and present evidence. Preponderance of evidence establishes criminal behavior. People do not, for example, generally make the leap from spit-shined lives to robbing banks, and we learn from our own Declaration that it takes a “long train of abuses and usurpations” that “evinces a design”. Most of what the police present amounts to circumstance.
In a somewhat highly publicized case in 1832 London, one Sir Percy defended a murder client against unfounded accusations. With Constable Jones on the stand, after the Constable admitted dereliction of protocol following his apprehending the accused, Sir Percy pointedly asked him, “So, in other words, you investigate the obvious and ignore all else?” That sowed the seed of doubt and ultimately established the accused as an innocent. Unfortunately, because of such blunders it does seem to come down more to the quality of one’s attorney than the jurisprudence of one’s peers. Naturally, rich men afford better lawyers who do a better job at forcing the police and prosecutors to present a preponderance of evidence necessary for conviction.
These stories illustrate that so many things we take at face value ignore the Iceberg Principle. Only a small portion of what lies beneath is visible, and without taking into account the entire width and breadth of an issue, it’s easy to sink yourself on half truths and whole lies. When DNA analysis came out, several convicted felons were released because DNA RFLP technology exonerated them, even after a jury found them guilty. Just because someone throws allegations at you doesn’t mean they are true. No matter what you believe, the truth remains.
No comments:
Post a Comment