DUI Blog : Bad Drunk Driving Laws, False Evidence and a Fading Constitution
Read this post by Larry Taylor. He quotes further comments by LA DA Steve Cooley, who was a little pissed off last week that Robert Blade was acquitted (in a failed prosecution by his office). I searched and found the whole article that Taylor's post refers to, and here's the salient line that is really chilling:
"It was harsh. It was blunt, and I could have phrased it differently, but bottom line it was the wrong verdict. Sometimes jurors should be held accountable for their mistakes."
Now, let's think about that. Cooley may be saying (and probably is, to be charitable to him) that jururs need to be held accountable through public criticism of their idiotic verdicts. However, when one of the chief law enforcement officials in the county, a man who has the ability to get just about anyone arrested on the flimsiest of pretexts (the old saying that you could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich - it's true, and there are so many laws and crimes out there that finding one, any one, on just about anyone would be easy. Even short of indictment, the amount of harassment that a DA can do through search warrants, subpoenaes for personal appearances and every document you own, or other actions, is so easy that it's chilling), starts talking about holding jurors who don't vote the way his office wants when they sit on juries for his office's cases, well, then I think it's time to wonder if he's trying to intimidate future jurors.
In fact, maybe defense lawyers need to start making motions to recuse his office in any case, so that new jurors will not have the impression that they may be intimidated into reaching guilty verdicts everytime they sit on one of his office's cases. This is something that people should check out. Thoughts, anyone (I'm sure Patterico will have some strong objections to my idea and my views).