Wednesday

Just Macon It...

After two days of eating and teaching, I'm already nearly spent. Tomorrow: Teaching impeachment to Group 'A'--the most experienced set of lawyers at the college. Should be lots of fun. Outstanding Low Country Boil tonight thanks to Macon's own pair of super lawyers: Frank and Laura Hogue.


The very tasty "Low Country Boil"

Meanwhile, I spotted a new BBQ place just outside of town on Eisenhower parkway. BBQ report soon...

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

In Georgia, make SURE you get some peachers.

And "Macon" it...c'mon, you can do better than that! :)

Rev. Music

Gerry said...

Boston GLOBE
Rethinking crime and punishment
July 26, 2006

DAVID FEIGE'S article ``Innocence by the numbers" (Ideas, July 16) misses the point of what Justice Antonin Scalia elucidated about the death penalty and why the judge quoted my research. Truly innocent people convicted of any major crime are so rare that they merit headline coverage.

The debate about capital punishment should be intellectually honest, and it is wrong to ignore cases such as that of Roger Coleman, executed in 1992 and held out as an example of a wrongly convicted man until DNA tests proved this year that he was in fact the murderer that the state of Virginia claimed. As Justice Scalia pointed out, Coleman is one of many who have been heralded as ``innocent men on death row," only to be quietly proved later to have been guilty as charged.

Nobody who works in the justice system thinks it is infallible, but we do recognize it is time to start considering the dire consequences of not punishing the truly guilty.

JOSHUA MARQUIS
Astoria, Ore.

The writer, Clatsop County district attorney, is a contributing author of ``Debating the Death Penalty."

Anonymous said...

Alright, MR. Marquis, when the HELL did you become a mentally challenged attorney?


the dire consequences you speak of? Who the hell hasn't though of that?
If you have a J.D. you probably have.

And if you have a clue about how to make a good (valid) argument, that is absolutely irrelevant to the article that you speak of.

And you want to be intellecutally honest...ask yourself this:

in an adversarial system (as the U.S. has), how often do you think it is a guilty person is agreed to be innocent (after being found guilty of course), then PROVEN by DNA to be innocent?

Do you honestly think that number is higher than the number of innocent people being punished even though they are INNOCENT.

If you do, seriously, do all people a favor, and never look a jury in the face again. And go back to law school for your ridiculous insinuation.

And please if you will comment about his article, and insinuate a fallacy: please make it better. The fallacy of assuming a single as the whole, is absolutely rediculous.

The facts don't lie, there are by far more innocent people punished than guilty people NOT punished.

and FURTHERMORE, for those guilty people that are free, you can blame that on lack of preparation on a prosecutor's part (at least for the most part).

Rev. Music

Anonymous said...

boil this