I haven't got much sympathy for Sen. Ted Stevens, but I do have to evince a degree of sympathy for anyone who has to appear before a jury of his peers, or at least a jury containing this juror:
A juror dismissed from the trial of Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) after she told the judge her father had died in California admitted in court today that her excuse had been a lie: She actually left town to attend a horse race.
...
Hinnant told reporters outside the courthouse that she believed Stevens was guilty "like all the other" politicians, but refused to say whether she would have voted to convict him.
The right to defend yourself before an impartial jury of your peers is one of the essential checks on government power and tyranny. It is a shame that so many of our citizens take that right so lightly.
1 comment:
This may not ever get read, but I just wanted to jump in and say that "jury of one's peers" is a British concept, intended to make sure that the nobility were judged only by fellow nobles. All that American law promises, I believe, is an impartial jury.
(Just as well, I guess, since finding 12 corrupt Republican politicians and flying them to Alaska would be quite an expense.)
Post a Comment