Quote of note:
"No one is sleeping on it," Russo said. "Everybody is working to resolve it. But the criminal justice system is at a standstill. We will be forced to make a decision as to which of these defendants are going to have to be released."
Justice Is Another Victim of Katrina
Some suspects go free because the system lacks the means to charge them; more wait behind bars. And cases mount along with new crimes.
By Scott Gold
Times Staff Writer
November 26, 2005
NEW ORLEANS — It was telling, one recent morning, that despite the presence of prosecutors, defense attorneys, bailiffs and 27 shackled inmates in orange jumpsuits, New Orleans Magistrate Anthony J. Russo felt compelled to point out: "This is a court."
"We are going to have the same decorum," he cautioned.
Russo, a 31-year veteran of the bench, is one of a handful of judges presiding over the only form of criminal justice in New Orleans. Court is held in the basement of the local jail with a ratty, peeling ceiling and yardstick notches on the wall because the room was once used for police lineups.
Every case, from traffic tickets to homicides, is argued here. The building has no heat; one prosecutor wore woolly gloves while she argued her case. A stubborn pool of water hugs the entrance, so a wooden pallet is used as a bridge, Municipal Court Judge Sean Early said.
Nothing, perhaps, embodies the civic collapse of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina so much as the city's criminal justice system.
Defense attorneys have dubbed New Orleans "Guantanamo on the Bayou," because some clients have been held for months without access to the court system.
The attorneys have begun seeking, and winning, the release of their clients, as judges have agreed with some regularity that people accused of crimes cannot be held indefinitely without a hearing, even in an emergency.
Indeed, even while Orleans Parish Dist. Atty. Eddie Jordan pledges to resurrect his agency and finish prosecuting 3,000 cases, law enforcement and criminal justice authorities acknowledge that the release of some defendants in recent weeks could be just the beginning.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Furl
Google
Yahoo
All libertarians, including
All libertarians, including Libertarians, believe it is the role of government to operate the criminal court system, and to do so with integrity.
All a Libertarian would have
All a Libertarian would have to do is opt out of the community to be immune to the community's justice system.
The real threat, of course, is defunding the government to the point that it can't perform its functions...which would only result in the immediate dominance of those non-state entitiesMartin Van Creveld was talking about. Instant New World Order.
All a Libertarian would have
All a Libertarian would have to do is opt out of the community to be immune to the community's justice system.
Libertarians aren't known for the "you can leave if you don't like it" solution, when you're discussing geography. In fact, the only people I've heard that line from are liberals, "you're free to leave the country if you don't like our rules, and thus your liberty is being respected".
The real threat, of course, is defunding the government to the point that it can't perform its functions.
There are two hard-core functions of government which all libertarians agree with. The criminal court system, and defending the borders.
If you can imagine a government doing nothing other than that, you've got the extreme Libertarian view down.
There's a lot of space between here and there, there's a lot of space between me and there.
Libertarians aren't known
Never have I made such a suggestion.
Then it must tax. And (since geography isn't an issue) they would force those who don't want to live by their rules into compliance, just because they happen to live near them. Which makes Libertarianism a rather hypocritical gesture.
So you're not defending them.
Then it must tax.The
Then it must tax.
The extremists have an answer which doesn't involve taxes, but I don't find it practical enough to even try to explain it. Something to do with fees at the border.
So you're not defending them.
No, but I give them these:
1. They set the boundaries way out there so that people like me can be moderates.
2. They don't represent a threat of any kind. Not physical, or even intellectual, so everyone is free to safely ignore them.
I for example find it perfectly acceptable for the federal government to construct and maintain an interstate highway system using taxes on fuel for funding.
I find the needs of society to overwhelm the loss of freedom caused by forced schooling of children.
More generally, I don't mind government involvement in a lot of things so long as they can resist the temption to subsidize things politically in-favor by taxing things politically out-of-favor.
I don't mind a limited amount of progressivity, and I abhor the transfer of wealth from young people starved for cash and having little political power to old, rich, connected people.
I like feeling confident that everyone who starves to death in America, or even goes to bed hungry has chosen to redeploy available resources to something they preferred over food.
I like feeling confident
Get over that illusion and you'll have made progress. Not on race specifically, but...