Judge John Roll was killed by a psycho in the Tucson shooting.
Shortly after I read about a case he presided over where the author of the article figured that Judge Roll's ruling would not be overturned because that would establish that if you were unhappy with a ruling, just off the judge in question.
Did he even consider that refusing to change the ruling because the presiding judge is dead is telling a whole other camp of whackos that if they are HAPPY with a ruling then assassinating the judge will CEMENT that ruling?
I say we look at the cases on their merits and ignore the actions of the deranged.
Click here to submit $0.00 US for a lifetime subscription
Posts
Comments
No comments:
Post a Comment
You are a guest here when you comment. This is my soapbox, not yours. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.
Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.
If you're trying to comment anonymously: You can't. Log into your Google account.
If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.