Seems that our lords and masters are a bit nervous about the notion that a jury of ordinary Americans might someday, somehow, decide their fate. See, for example, the case of Conrad Black pilfering millions:
[Conrad] Black's lawyers even argued (unsuccessfully) that their client could not get a fair trial because the average Chicagoan "does not reside in more than one residence, employ servants or a chauffeur, enjoy lavish furniture, or host expensive parties".
I, for one, would relish Darth Cheney's trial for looting billions out of the Treasury for the benefit of Halliburton while our soldiers died for his profit. Fair trial. Conviction. Rope. Just sayin', ya know?
- Badtux the not-cryin' Penguin
Oh right -- he thinks "peers" as in Lords. Yanno, the rich and the richer. What slime.
ReplyDeleteFair trial. Conviction. Rope.
ReplyDeleteI'm there.
Maybe they should call Paris Hilton, or a few like her, whadaya think?
ReplyDeleteThink he'd settle for some peons, real quick-like?
Okay, why are conservatives turning into sissy crybabies? All week long it's been crying and whining and complaining.
ReplyDelete"Waaaah! Senator Boxer won't let me shout down Al Gore!"
"Waaaaah! I don't want my private life to be an issue--even if I did screw anything that moved while I was married and trying to impeach the president!"
"Waaaaah! I don't wanna sit in a courtroom with poor people! I don't wanna! I don't wanna!"
What ever, history shows time and again that the poor rise up against the rich and start killing them.
ReplyDeleteThey just never get it.
Best to tenderize them first.
ReplyDeleteWith tire irons.
Hear, hear!
ReplyDeleteThe "dumb scum" shall rise up! The sissy crybaby conservatives see what's over the horizon, and they're afeared!
ReplyDeleteMixter
At one time, "trial by your peers" meant just that: people would be tried by a jury of their own class. The British were still doing this until the mid 19th century (I could look up the exact date, but that would require me getting out of my chair).
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure the military has completely dropped that system yet. Isn't a court martial board usually one or two ranks above the accused? I suppose at one time this made a tiny bit of sense in that you wouldn't want someone holding judgment on someone who could retaliate and intimidate them. In practice it means lower ranks are judged by their supervisors and upper ranks are judged by their social peers. Like I said, I'm not sure if it still works exactly that way.