Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[RedKing]

I applaud that the persona morality of these two, but I also recognize that this sets bad precedent. I think they'd be better served taking the case and just making a very lacksadaisical defense of the measure.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe willfully lackadaisical defense is still ground for getting disbarred.

They'd have to prove that it was willful. Which....they probably can now, after those public comments. I submit to change my comment to "they would have been better served".

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I disagree. The state can find other prosecutors for this if they need them, but expecting a blanket discard of your sense of ethics in exchange for money is something I find unacceptable.

[Truean]

I applaud that the persona morality of these two, but I also recognize that this sets bad precedent. I think they'd be better served taking the case and just making a very lacksadaisical defense of the measure.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe willfully lackadaisical defense is still ground for getting disbarred.

They'd have to prove that it was willful. Which....they probably can now, after those public comments. I submit to change my comment to "they would have been better served".

I'm going to have to play Devil's advocate on this...the legal system doesn't require an attorney to believe in what they're arguing. You're a defense attorney, you know this better than most. If you're assigned a case as a public defender, you can't just walk in and say, "You know what? My client is totally guilty and an asshole and I'm not going to defend him."

Like it or not, lawyers are paid to argue the interests of their clients, even if they utterly disagree with those interests. In this case, the interests of the state of Illinois is to defend its laws until such time as they have been invalidated by a court of law.

By the same token, if a US District Attorney refused to prosecute a case of anti-LGBT discrimination because they didn't "believe" such people should have those protections....it's the same principle.

I applaud that the persona morality of these two, but I also recognize that this sets bad precedent. I think they'd be better served taking the case and just making a very lacksadaisical defense of the measure.

The fatal flaw in your logic, Redking, is that precedent has not already been set. It has.

Prosecutorial discretion has a bad history in many cases.

Concerning its application to GLBT individuals as criminal defendants or victims, prosecutorial discretion was as overplayed as it was misapplied. Granted, there are some instances, such as plea bargaining, and dropping charges where it's good, but they didn't cut you slack if you were gay, quite the opposite. Prosecutorial discretion was championed by social conservatives for quite some time as a means of lowering "harsh" hate crime laws before many of them were made mandatory. Now that it's being used against them, "When the shoe's on the other foot...." Suddenly, it's "an abuse of power."

[RedKing]

Oh of course they're going to be hypocritical about it. What I'm saying is that being equally hypocritical (saying it was an abuse of power then, but is a principled stand now) isn't somehow more defensible.

[Truean]

The attitude that "well of course you got assaulted/raped/whatever; you're gay. What'd you expect?" was the norm here for decades. And if you were a lesbian, then I guess the guy was just trying to "cure you."

Holy shit dude, two words: "Twinkie Defense." The son of a bitch killed the mayor and a city councilman, but it's not that bad, said the prosecution and the jury, because one of 'em was gay and the guy was eating too many twinkles or whatever. Harvey Milk.

Seriously, he assassinated the damn mayor and a city councilman ("supervisor") and people felt bad for him, because he drank a lot of soda and other junk food.

[kaijyuu]

Correct me if I'm using the wrong terminology and getting things mixed up.


What these guys are doing is "Prosecutorial discretion." This is a bad thing, no? You've given examples of where it's abused, so that's damn good reason to not allow it at all. You can't change the rules because it conveniences you. If it's bad in previous cases, it's bad here.

[Truean]

.

[GlyphGryph]

No matter how much time and money plea bargains save the system, they are an inherently corrupting influence that serves to put innocent people behind bars and let the guilty get off with minimal consequences.

The fact that we even consider using them is a testament to the failure that is our justice system.

[Leafsnail]

State prosecutors are inherently different to attorneys though, aren't they?  Prosecutors aren't meant to keep pressing a case they think has collapsed or which they don't think is defensible.  It's partially up to them to decide if the case is worth fighting for the state or if it has become a completely lost cause.  Essentially, while everyone has a right to be defended in court so attorneys should have to take a case even if it looks hopeless, a prosecutor shouldn't pointlessly get into fights they can't win.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

No matter how much time and money plea bargains save the system, they are an inherently corrupting influence that serves to put innocent people behind bars and let the guilty get off with minimal consequences.

The fact that we even consider using them is a testament to the failure that is our justice system.

We wouldn't even need them if not for the war on drugs. If all the crime related to that were crippled the justice administration would be able to handle the number of cases that are given to them, or at least do a better job of it.

[Euld]

Got another email from that Christian group... and well... honestly I don't think they're entirely in the wrong this time.  Long story short, the local LGBT group of a small town submitted a proposal for some pro-gay additions to a K-4th grade school in town.  Some of these additions didn't seem so shocking, like adding in children's books that discuss kids with same sex parents.  But on the other hand, the suggestions went as far as requiring math problems to include word problems that mentioned same sex parents.  Naturally, the school board rejected the proposal and didn't do much else.  Then the LGBT group started an ad campaign to gather national attention and try to... humiliate the town into accepting the proposal?  No idea.  Naturally, this Christian group is quick to say "gayzz r bein boolies!!1!".  But I hate to say it, I think I agree with the Christian group a bit more than I want to.

I remember when the gay jokes started in school.  I didn't even know about the word gay until the 5th grade when suddenly everyone started using it and every boy was very quick to declare ANYTHING NEGATIVE WHATSOEVER as gay, even pencils.  I honestly believe that if gays are to have any sort of peace and quiet in this country, it won't happen unless the discussion of homosexuality starts at about that time.  Heck, they started freaken' sex ed and puberty education in the fifth grade at my school.  They don't have to go into detail on the subject.  Just mention that some students may realize they are attracted to different people than they expected and that's ok.

edit: er so in other words, the LGBT group needs to calm down, pick their battles, try to ease things up a bit.  And this Christian website (why did I ever sign up for these guys...) needs to stop snickering so obviously.

[penguinofhonor]

So... what about the inclusive word problems doesn't help in starting recognition and discussion of gays? I mean, one of the easiest ways for kids to identify something as weird is if they've never seen it before, and if all the media in their schools is straight then that's a pretty obvious marker of what's supposed to be normal.

Really, I don't consider it any different than the children's books.

[kaijyuu]

People need to stop conflating "teaching" the young with "indoctrinating" them. I'm cool with them occasionally mentioning same sex parents/etc (including in math problems or whatever), but it's not something that should be considered part of the curriculum.

If there's something that needs to be focused on concerning societal ills in public schools, it's bullying and harassment problems. That includes bullying/harassment for sexual orientation, of course. That's when sexual orientation needs to be brought up by teachers; no, it is NOT okay to tease someone for that. That's perfectly normal, young ones.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Has anyone else noticed how Christian and/or Family Values sites are always designed in this simplistic, one color theme?

[GlyphGryph]

Uh... wow.

It turns out the big banks actually WERE conspiring to steal from us all, all along. Like, literally working together, lying to the government, to clients, to regulatory committees. GE, J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America, UBS, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Wachovia, all of them were in on it, and they broke a lot of laws, perfecting criminal practices that used to keep the mafia in business.

This is just three small cogs in the machine, but this shit runs deep. Since it doesn't look like the mainstream media is going to touch this, might be worth spreading it a bit until they don't have a choice...

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-scam-wall-street-learned-from-the-mafia-20120620?print=true