« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: double jeopardy for z 

By: Cactus Flower in ALEA | Recommend this post (1)
Fri, 19 Jul 13 6:25 AM | 32 view(s)
Boardmark this board | The Trust Matrix
Msg. 14153 of 54959
(This msg. is a reply to 14151 by tkc)

Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

Hi tkc,

Maybe. But knowing this, he owed Z the protection of his authority and the presumption of innocence.

Instead he's manouevred the cloud of suspicion back over his head. He did it because he didn't want to tell the multitudes the truth. He did it for political reasons when the AG is the person to represent the requirements and principles of the law. Z is not guilty under the law and should be provided the presumption of innocence by the AG if he has no case to answer.

No one tells the goddam truth. It's all mush and cotton wool and calculation to palliate people who ought not to be palliated. And to pass the cost to someone who should not have to accept it. I don't respect that so much.


- - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: double jeopardy for z
By: tkc
in ALEA
Fri, 19 Jul 13 5:14 AM
Msg. 14151 of 54959

Hi CF, What could be the charge? Is there a witness that would be able to provide credible proof of a civil rights violation? Did someone hear Z call T a "name?" Is it provable that Z "profiled" T? There is nothing there I can see provable. It's just political bluster unless I missed something. It's a sad result of a poorly written law that should be revisited and at a minimum significantly clarified. Holder won't charge Z.


« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next