But the Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial goes to the defendants. If the defendants aren't complaining, why is the judge acting sua sponte and invoking Rule 3.6?
And why aren't any of the talking heads with law degrees questioning the judge's authority to apply a professional conduct rule to non-attorneys?
"But the Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial goes to the defendants."
but as interpreted in modern times, this applies only to defendants who are not white preppie kids, in which case there shall be no speedy trial, no change of venue,
no free access to the press, no right to freedom from search and siezure without warrant, no right to counsel present at interrogation, no right to prompt discovery, and no right to an impartial judge and jury.
Other than that, the 6th amendment still applies.
And if you don't think that's an accurate appraisal,
just look to Durham.
(There's one for the appendix or a footnote in all new editions of law textbooks in the chapter on the 6th amendement)
Chapter 1: The Water Buffalo Affair
http://www.shadowuniv.com/excerpts-wb1.html
http://www.upenn.edu/gazette/0503/hackney5.html
Houston Baker, late of Duke, was all in the middle of this golden oldie. See second link...
If the defendants aren't complaining, why is the judge acting sua sponte and invoking Rule 3.6?
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
YES. YES. And Ninfong isn't complaining either (outside of closed door private meetings) - Because he CAN'T.
If Nifong did, he'd get the scathing Motion dragging him through the Mud for all of this prejudical comments and perjoratives that he's slung.
But, the Judge comes from nowhere and does what someone should be requesting - it's a MIRACLE! - and a damn strange coincidence once again. These guys, including the Judges, should wear Jerseys with Numbers on them - because it's like one big team.