[Conscience of a Conservative]

If the prosecutor’s decision to press charges is discriminatory in nature, the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause can be violated. For example, in Yick Wo. v. Hopkins (118 U.S. 356 [1886]), the Supreme Court stated: Though the law itself be fair on its face and impartial in appearance, yet, if it is applied and administered by public authority with an evil eye and an unequal hand, so as practically to make unjust and illegal discriminations between persons in similar circumstances, material to their rights, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the Constitution. (pp. 373–374) Simply put, if an individual is targeted for prosecution merely because he or she falls into a certain group (e.g., a minority group), then his or her constitutional rights will be violated. This is known as selective prosecution."

Did you even read what you wrote? Selective prosecution concerns treating similarly-situated people differently. How the heck does that apply here? Where are the similarly-situated people who were not charged with a crime? Who was targeted because they fall into a certain group?

Spewing irrelevant nonsense and insults is all you have.

[Nervous Tick]

>> Did you even read what you wrote? Selective prosecution concerns treating similarly-situated people differently. How the heck does that apply here?

Whoa there, cowboy... you’re changing the subject. As usual, you slippery snake.

I never said *this* case is directly relevant to the Baltimore prosecution.

This whole discussion of ours concerns your BLANKET statements regarding the ABSOLUTE that a prosecutor’s charging decision is IN NO WAY APPEALABLE.

I just destroyed your lie with one such case... that’s all it takes.

Now, do I have to shove your nose in your earlier piles of poop that erroneously claim that charging decisions as a class are not subject to appeal, like the little carpet-soiling bitch dog that you are?

Or are you going to admit that you made a false claim and back down?