Chambers wrote:
> "Traffic Court Judge Terry Hannon said he didn't think the officer did
> anything wrong but he had to find Stensgaard guilty because he violated
> the letter of the law."
>
> So we've got a judge who admits that the officer broke the law, but he
> "didn't think the officer did anything wrong."
When has any judge ever let a common Joe off of the hook under the exact
same circumstances? When has a judge ever let a person prone to such
let-off-the-hook thinking serve on a jury?
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|