What Kind of Country Do We Want to Live In?
This question is fundamental to our votes in the elections coming up in November.

6/3/24

Suppose we have a judicial system that’s rigged, whereby politically motivated prosecutors use the power of their offices to indict their opponents, unjustifiably. What’s the right path forward in such situations?

Right now, under our system of justice, the court system serves as the arbiter. The alleged criminal has the right to have his or her case heard by a jury of disinterested peers who are vetted by both sides of the dispute. The jury’s charge is to determine guilt or lack thereof based solely on the evidence presented.

The rules and regulations pertaining to the admissibility of evidence are well prescribed, and the judge bears responsibility to assure that those rules are scrupulously followed on an even-handed and impartial basis. Critically, if the decision goes against the accused, those rules allow for an appeal of the verdict to a higher court with the mandate to assure that the lower court’s rulings and instructions followed the law. Also important is the fact that the onus of proving guilt lies with the prosecution. Failure to satisfy this requirement precludes a guilty verdict.

The argument that “(s)he never should have been charged in the first place,” misses the point. Our public…