Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SalukiLawyer
You must have missed the first part. This was a case of the state vs the state in the form of police officers.

during the recent trial of three sheriff's officers accused of beating a jail inmate to death.Himel called prosecution witnesses unreliable and inconsistent. He frequently interrupted testimony and argued constantly with prosecutors, who sought to have him removed from the case.

Having a judge behave in this way makes it look bad to the community. I will bet you that rumors are flying about "the fix was in" on this case.

The acquitted officers will always have a cloud of suspicion hanging over their heads now, whether it is deserved or not.

a.cricket

4 posted on 05/09/2002 8:24:53 PM PDT by another cricket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: another cricket
it is never state vs. state, even when defendants are police officers :-) But down here judges are much more civil.
5 posted on 05/10/2002 5:47:52 AM PDT by SalukiLawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson