Friday, 11 August 2006
Fletcher's Hearing Today
« Civil War in the Kentucky Republican Party | Main | Fletcher Will Not Have To Stand Trial Until After He Leaves Office »Today is the day where Fletcher's team has a hearing on his motion to dismiss. We'll update as soon as we hear anything from the proceedings.
What is curious is that the Courier-Journal ran a story yesterday about another AG filing. This one explaining why Fletcher's administration hadn't been singled out for prosecution
Prosecutors from the Attorney General���s office said in a court filing Thursday, ���It would be improper for the Commonwealth to excuse the Defendant���s criminal conduct because other politicians before him may have committed similar crimes.���
Yeah we have already heard that a number of times. Why are they covering this again? It almost seems like the Courier is trying to bolster this argument for some reason.
I think there may be good reason the AG's office and the Courier are worried about it. Back in the 60's on of the major rulings in the Kentucky Supreme Court was the "Heck Case". This was a case where the prosecutors unfairly singled out one store for prosecution. The supreme court in that case ruled that one can not be selectively chosen for prosecution of a law without prosecuting everyone.
At first the Courier wanted us to believe that since the AG indicted a number of people this can't apply. But in the Heck case a number of people from the Heck store where prosecuted. No the problem is no Democrat was ever prosecuted the Merit system laws in the last 45 years.
But the most damning evidence in favor of such a ruling is the actions of Stumbo himself. In 2003, he was AG when the Personnel Board ruled that Patton's administration was involved in some nefarious hiring schemes. The statue of limitations didn't run out on that case until well into Stumbo's tenure in the AG's office. Yet neither Chandler nor Stumbo decided to prosecute the case.
We'll see how this all shakes out.
UpdateThe Lexington Herald a story today that almost begs the judge not to throw out the case.
Even the perceived integrity of the judicial branch is at stake, observers say.
"I think if you ask most voters, they want a public trial and want everything aired out because there's been so many denials," said Stephen Horner, a legal analyst and former juvenile justice judge from Louisville. "If they don't get it, it looks like good ol' boy politics prevailed."
"I think it would look bad for both the executive branch and the judicial branch."
What the hell? Why would it be bad for either branch? If the judge throws it out it can mean only one thing. That the judge looked at the evidence and saw nothing there to convict Fletcher. Any other explaination is pure spin and poppy cock. This story has become quite sureal as the evidence mounts that Fletcher's case may be thrown out.
