Save the Banana Boys
ArchPundit
Via OneMan
Wow, some administrator needs to get a life
1) It was funny
2) No one was hurt
3) There was no danger
4) There was nothing unwholesome about it
5) There was no significant disruption
The horrors.
Uncategorized
Huh
John Fritchey citing KRS One on violence. Not a natural pairing.
Quinn Jumps In
QUINN: To be running away and not fully engaging the people of Illinois, who are the voters, the taxpayers, the people who we are accountable to, I don’t think that’s the right way to go. I think Governor Blagojevich should speak to the public and answer questions about anything and everything.And if the allegations about the governor are true?
QUINN: Well, if anyone committed wrongdoing, I think they should, uh, turn themselves in and suffer the consequences.
Quinn says he hasn’t personally seen any evidence of corruption in the administration. The governor hasn’t been charged with a crime, and a spokeswoman denies that he’s done anything wrong.
Make the Primary End
I just want it over…..
Just Start Banging Your Head on the Wall Now
Apparently some twits seem to be up in arms about sample ballots.
Philly-resident Atrios has an explanation of what this is all about. These are not actual ballots. Rather, they are “sample ballots,” handed out by a given candidate’s supporters, basically telling voters who to vote for and how to vote for him or her.
To be clear, the Hillary campaign is not alleging irregularities around this. The Hillary camp sent over the Obama-only sample ballot only to clarify that this is happening on both sides and that it isn’t irregular. The Obama campaign is not alleging irregularities around the Hillary-only sample ballot, either.
While I’m strongly against literacy tests and the sort, we might have found a standard by which to judge if someone is competent to vote.
More On Hearsay
Some pedant (just kidding SS–it’s a good point) in comments pointed out that hearsay is often allowed in criminal trials and that is certainly true. Wikipedia gives you the dumbed down version.
The particular bill Wilhelmi is putting forward is especially problematic though:
Sen. A.J. Wilhelmi (D- Joliet) has offered an amendment to the state’s code of criminal procedure, backed by State’s Atty. James Glasgow, that would allow hearsay testimony if the witness who made the statements was not available to testify in person because the defendant had a hand in that person’s absence.
Neither Wilhelmi nor Glasgow’s office would comment on whether the measure was inspired by the Peterson case, but the senator said the state’s attorney requested the amendment earlier this year. Glasgow’s office has been immersed in the investigation with a special grand jury since late last year.
Under the proposal, if prosecutors can convince a judge that the defendant, for example, bribed, threatened or killed a witness to prevent testimony, the judge could allow the statements the witness made to others to be heard in court.
Essentially this bill would require the Judge make a determination about the guilt of the person potentially under trial under these circumstances. This can result in two things:
1) The hearsay is never admitted in trial because the judge cannot make such a determination
2) The admittance of such information is prejudicial towards a defendant because it requires a finding that the defendant was responsible for at least a portion of the crime the defendant is charged with….
Neither is a good result. The law is not entirely crazy in terms of legal theory as making a witness unavailable is something that can allow hearsay, but in this case, the entire justification is the issue at question.
Decide Which Ad MoveOn Runs for Obama
Click the ad in the upper corner…
Not a Surprising Headline
Former state Sen. Larry Walsh charged with DUI
We all make our mistakes, however, and let’s hope this is one mistake and not many.