Monday, November 23, 2009

What Do You Think About This?

I heard a comment on Fox News that got me thinking. It was a simple comment but often it is the simple ones that stir your thoughts.

The conversation was about trying the 9/11 terrorists in NYC. The comment was (paraphrasing) "it depends on which judge hears the case". It was in reaction to a discussion on what is going to happen during the trial as far as the discovery process. Will the prosecutions case be damaged by an inability to release sensitive material? Will the terrorists get a hold of information that we do not want them to? Will the whole discovery process cause a mistrial?

So this is the question - what are your thoughts on the statement "it depends on which judge hears the case"?

We all have stories of activist judges allowing horrible criminals off because of a twisted interpretation of the US Constitution. Child rapists have gone free. Drug dealers.

Will we get a far left judge who wants to make a statement about the US war on terror? Will the terrorists fire their lawyer to get their hands on the info themselves as some have suggested? Will a judge allow them to get the info?

We have cases in the past in which defense lawyers have passed secrets on to terrorists. Will this happen again if an activist judge decides they have a right to classified secrets?

What are your thoughts?

12 comments:

Brooke said...

"So this is the question - what are your thoughts on the statement "it depends on which judge hears the case"?"

It is chilling, because it shows that judges so obviously legislate from the bench. If they were applying the Constitution, it wouldn't matter who heard the case.

Miss T.C. Shore said...

I think the "fix is in," so to speak. Do you think that in New York they will get anything BUT a left leaning judge? This trial will put the Bush administration and water boarding and the whole guantanamo facility on trial.

This is exactly what Obama wants. He promised to close Gitmo within a a year. That's not going to happen. He needs a judge to help him get off-center politically on this issue so he can do what he wanted to do in the first place.

cube said...

The only way to try these terrorists is a military tribunal. Any other venue is a poke in the eye of America.

I know Eric Holder isn't a judge, but a like-minded judge might want to send a message about "America's misbegotten war on terror" and throw out the confession and most of the evidence. We'd end up with another OJ trial. Who knows Khalid may go free to bomb another day.

I hope all those New York liberals who voted for Obama are happy with the hopey changey thing.

Chuck said...

Brooke,

If they were applying the Constitution, it wouldn't matter who heard the case.

That is the thing isn't it?

Miss TC, good point. I hadn't thought about the fact that there are only lib judges in NYC

Cube, insult to all who died on 9/11

shoprat said...

This is one more step in the Obama's plan to destroy this country.

Anonymous said...

I agree with Miss Shore; the fix is in. This isn't about justice, otherwise those bastards would already be executed.

No, this is about showing conservative Americans who's in charge now. America be damned.

And it will be ... I grow more disgusted every day.

Mustang

Chuck said...

Shoprat, one step at a time

Mustang, agreed

Karen Howes said...

Chuck, I'm not sure you want to hear my thoughts. The fact that this piece of sheise is being tried in a civilian court instead of a military tribunal (if the lowlife must be tried at all) opens a whole can of politically-correct worms.

He must be afforded the same rights as an American citizen. So if he didn't have his Miranda Rights read to him... ugh.

So yes, if he gets some activist judge, who knows. I just wonder about the jury.

MK said...

My thoughts are that there are too many, if's, maybe's and but's for this to ever have made it to NYC. What was obama thinking, oh yeah, how best to screw over America.

Randy said...

In theory, justice is blind and any judge will have the same results. Following the law of the land (The Constitution and other legislation) will lead to the same results.

However, we all know that theory is just theory.

While I think a trial in NY will be injurious to the US, I think the administration has painted themselves into a corner. If the trial goes the way some here think it will, the administration will be seen as soft on terrorism. On the other hand, if they are harsh, the left won't be satisfied.

We on the right need to keep this story on the forefront, to make sure these terrorists get what's coming to them, or at least as much of what's coming as they can get in a public trial.

DaBlade said...

It depends on the judge to determine whether or not America is stil worth protecting and defending.

Like Mike Love of the Beach Boys once sang: "I wish they all could be California girls and wise Latina women".

Chuck said...

Karen, your opinion is welcomed. Agreed, a NYC jury is just as scary. I have said this elsewhere, it only takes one juror to cause a mistrial. Your right on the Miranda rights, no statements by them could possibly be kept

Randy, theory is a nice thing isn't it? I think in the end only the far left are going to support Obama's decision here. Their lawyer has already as much as said this will be a show trial.

DaBlade, LMAO