Saturday, December 17, 2005

Judices in stuporem

Death in Texas

One’s right to life rests more upon technicalities than moralities in the State of Texas. About a dozen years ago, the Supreme Court decided that as long as someone had received a “fair” trial, new evidence showing innocence was inadmissible and therefore killing an innocent person is constitutional. [Herrera Vs. Collins] So much for the arguments against moral relativism one hears from the Red States. So much for arguments about activist judges twisting the law.

The State of Texas, red in tooth, claw and politics has once again decided that killing a retarded man is acceptable because of a technicality and the courts support the clamor of the Red State crowd.

The question of right and wrong isn’t what our legal system is about says Crankyboy. If you’ve received due process, you’ve received your due, but then, he’s tautologist as well as an attorney. Still, who can disagree that the law is not for us, but a weapon used against us.

The New York Times reports today that although the Supreme Court has prohibited the execution of the mentally retarded, a Texas death row inmate with an IQ of 61 and who has trouble understanding how a belt buckle works, cannot raise the issue in federal court because his lawyer missed a filing deadline.

"However harsh the result may be," said a Federal Appeals Court, its hands are tied by deadlines established in a 1996 federal law, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. The same law now forbids Marvin Lee Wilson to appeal the Fifth Circuit's ruling to the Supreme Court which in 2002 ruled the execution of the retarded to be illegal. The SCOTUS has been critical of the Fifth Circuit’s handling of capital punishment cases. Capt. Fogg is too. The judges who handed down, or rather excreted this decision were Jacques L. Wiener Jr. and Emilio M. Garza, both appointed to the appeals court by the first President Bush, and W. Eugene Davis, by President Reagan. It’s not that I think that the Republicans are a lot of amoral hypocrites – I think they’re animals. I await the snubbing of the Supreme Court’s ruling that the execution of children is illegal and I’m sure Texas will step up to the gibbet before long.

I’d rather not hear any more Red State garbage about morals, family values, Christianity or the danger of Liberal thought. If due process in our country can allow judges to wash their hands of the blood of children, the mentally ill and the innocent and cite some Faeces taurum as an excuse, then our country has nothing to lecture the world about.

Let them rave on about their fake war on Christmas, let them mock at the trial of the innocent and let them hope that God is not just.


Crankyboy said...

I feel famous now. I've been mis-quoted with the best of them. What I said was it's called "due process" as in what process you are due. It's not called "perfect process." The process you are due in a capital case is different than the process you are due for a parking ticket. And, I might add, I said sarcasticly that in Texas "due process" mean what process you are due which is nothing - and you'll like it. It was a broad swipe at Texas. Capt. Fogg has interpreted it as a swipe on me. He should be demoted to private.

Capt. Fogg said...

First of all, Capt Fogg is not a Navy Captain, but a Pirate Captain and as such can do whatever the hell he pleases.

Second of all, the alleged misquote (which is simply an editorial adjustment with no difference in implication)is permissible under the Laws of Sarcasm, section 2, paragraph iii, when directed at Texas or Washington DC by someone with a beard.

As you have no evidence supporting your claim anyway, you'll have to live with it, but should you decide to take it as far as the Supreme Court, Judge Judy will no doubt concur.

Crankyboy said...

I have every communication recorded and preserved. The lawsuit is in the mail.

Capt. Fogg said...

Sorry, you don't have a case - and what if I leak the information that you pay me to write about your blog to the National Inquirer?

I also have sworn testimony from non-veterans who will testify that you never were in the D day invasion and that you were driving Ted Kennedy's car at chappaquiddick.

Make my day. . .