JUSTICE1st
Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Posts: 715
Location: USA
|
 Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 4:29 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Pia wrote: | | JUSTICE1st wrote: | | BillE wrote: |
Now I am left to question why such a prosecution ever moved forward. There are many reasons being offered and I personally have not been able to decide for certain the reason. I do look at the actions of the DA's office for answers and continue to be frustrated at what I see is a lack of proactive search for truth in this case. Instead what I observe is a huge CYA effort. And that speaks volumes to me.
Bill |
Although LG and BD will never admit to this, privately or publicly, I strongly believe this sham prosecution moved forward because one or both prosecutors made their almost-vitriolic disapproval of Cindy herself into a personal crusade. In their highly-biased viewpoint, such "conduct" should never be accepted, especially of a Marine widow, and when anyone does, they "must be punished," to the fullest extent possible. Whether they actually have a strong case or not, it doesn't matter. Whether they have hard evidence or not doesn't matter either. Only the "punishment" does.
Sound rather simplistic? Probably, but for me, it's the only conclusion that makes any sense. Prosecutors are human too, and they have their biases and prejudices like everyone else, despite their often-repeated efforts to deny them. I have to wonder, does LG or BD have anyone in their families who have served in the Marines or any branch of the military? I have noticed that many of those (not all, but many) who have judged Cindy most harshly are people with a military background, or are related to someone who served. They felt anyone who engages in this type of conduct "disrespects the military" almost as if that is a crime in itself.
To the best of my knowledge, "disrespect" (which is open to a boatload of interpretations) is NOT a crime, nor should it ever be made one. If that ever happens, anyone who ticks off any serviceperson in the military will be arrested, tried and convicted. And that would be TYRANNY, not justice.
J  |
I have to disagree with some of that Justice. Not only are there several military members retired/active/family (myself included) supporting Cindy there are also several people in law enforcement that are supporters.  |
Sorry, Pia, that was my fault for not making myself clearer. I didn't mean to imply that ALL who served in either the Marines or any other branch of the military were automatic "Cindy bashers," and my humblest apologies for conveying that impression. I did my best to qualify my previous post, but obviously not good enough. Sorry about that. 
Also, it's only ONE possible reason for their insisting that "she did it," there are of course many others, some of which we'll never know. It's just the way it came across to me at the time.
J
_________________
"We must remember, always, that accusation is not proof, and conviction depends on evidence and due process of law."
EDWARD R. MURROW, 1954 |
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
