Dear Denise: Thank you. I think I'll refrain from wasting my time by posting anymore comments. It's increasingly clear to me that your "newspaper" is suitable for only two things: 1) wrapping table scraps for the garbage, and 2) lining the bottoms of bird cages. Adios!
Dear BobbyT: Does it surprise you that a "religious organization" would have a sense of justice, or that it would encourage compassion and the decent treatment of people? Hopefully, we will have a new government in this country very soon that will better reflect the basic kindness and decency of the American people.
Dear NavyUSC: This was not an appeal. It was a second trial by a panel of three judges with witnesses and additional evidence presented. There was no matter of law to be decided here(as you correctly pointed out that is the essence of a true appeal). Instead of an appeal of a matter of law, there was an examination of witnesses and additional evidence. In short, there was a second trial. the U.S. Constitution expressly provides for trial by jury in all criminal matters, whether it be the first, second, or third trial. And we wonder why the NC judiciary got a "D"?
Dear John D: Since you love the Indy, have lots of time on your hands, and always babble on and on about everything, why don't you take Lisa Sorg's job? You couldn't do any worse than she has, and you might do better! My first constructive suggestion is that you try to find two or three real reporters like the recently departed Mosi Secret. You might find some reporters of Mosi's caliber if you were to roll up your sleeves and work at it. I know this is a tall order, but it may be doable. You're absolutely right about my utter contempt for the NC "D" rated judiciary. Remember, that's not my rating. It's the rating of a long -established, nationally recognized rating organization, HALT. You're also right about the fact that the three monkeys who heard the Reeve's case really don't deserve to have names at all! Do they name the monkeys at the Asheville zoo? We taxpayers are foolish to be building a new $106 million facility in Durham to house a bunch of monkeys!
Hi JohnD: I see that you still have lots of time on your hands to babble about nearly every article printed in the Indy. Only a really naive fellow like you would have any faith at all in our D+ rated judiciary. Reeves was entitled to a second trial by jury. He should not have been subjected to a kangaroo court hearing by a bunch of high-paid nameless monkeys. That was just another waste of the taxpayers' money. Again, the Indy was characteristically just too cowardly to name the monkeys who heard this case. I wonder if they really were wearing hoods? However, John D, I must commend you for your loyalty and dedication to the Indy, even though it is rapidly turnng into just another insipid rag like the N&O.
Black Cat: Most immigration lawyers in NC are paper-pushing clerks. They're good at filling out the unnecessarily complicated federal immigration forms and licking the mailing envelopes, but not much good for anything else. If you need a for real immigration lawyer, then I would suggest that you call Mr. Omar Baloch in Raleigh, 834-3535. Omar has a real taste for honest-to-goodness in-court litigation.
If there is going to be a trial at all it must be before a jury of one's peers...as the U.S. Constitution clearly provides. My constructive suggestion is that the corrupt politicos running our justice system be required to adhere to the Constitution. Why do you think the Founding Fathers required jury trials in nearly all cases?
All Comments »
Make sure you're signed up so we can inbox you the latest.
Login to choose your subscriptions!
Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation