The Morning Rant

WHY IS THIS EVEN POSSIBLE?

How did that ever pass constitutional muster? I thought "no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process" was a bedrock principal of our system of government. So how is it 'due process' when your property becomes forfeit just because some LE agency decides to raid your house?

I just don't get it.

Another thing I don't get is something that happened at the Rittenhouse trial on Friday:

Assistant District Attorney James Kraus pressed for 'a multitude of lesser charges' to be put before the jury when they are sent out to deliberate Monday

The same thing happened to George Zimmerman during his trial a few years ago. Just as the jury was being led out, the prosecution said, "oh, by the the way, in addition to 'A' and 'B' I want you to also consider charges 'C, 'D', 'E', 'F', and 'G' as well." I was shocked that nobody protested what seemed to me to be an obviously sleazy end run around due process. Because if anyone is charged with a crime, they ought to be allowed to rebut the charge, or at least defend themselves. But this tactic short-circuits any possible defense.

The assumption seems to be that the jury has all of the evidence and testimony it needs to adjudicate the new charges. But why? That's not obvious to me. If I were charged with a different crime, I might want to call different witnesses, or introduce different evidence. If I were the defense attorney, I'd be hollering at the prosecutor "look, pal, if you want to charge my client with new crimes, get your ass back in here and argue your case in open court!"

And if I were the judge, I would threaten the state with prosecutorial misconduct.

As I said, this is one of those crazy things lawyers and courts do, and it probably makes sense to them, but not to me. I just don't understand.

If Rittenhouse survives this, he will then face a state and federal civil trials, and that's another pet peeve of mine. Because it seems to me to be another way that prosecutors can sneak an end run around due process, in this case, the double jeopardy rule. In addition, in civil trials, the standards of evidence is not as high, which makes the prosecutor's job easier. Especially in a case like this, where accumulating a "preponderance" of evidence probably wouldn't be difficult. But that's the subject for another rant.

Blistering Hot Take:

Who Dis:

For the 'Ettes:

Friday Who Dis: Accomplished noir specialist Claire Trevor teamed up with Hollywood tough guy (both on and off the screen) Lawrence Tierney for a couple of movies, Born to Kill and Best of the Badmen.

Today's Edition Of The Morning Rant Is Brought To You By Apple Galette (Skillet Pie):

(Click for bigger galette)

Galette recipe available here.

Bonus Happy Hoppy Bunny:

Since your timeline is terrible right now, here’s one of my favorite videos- a joyful bunny jumping through leaves… pic.twitter.com/kIut84wpb2

— Carol Roth (@caroljsroth) November 11, 2021

posted by OregonMuse at 11:18 AM

| Access Comments