Comments on: The Victimocracy Strikes Back http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/10/the-victimocracy-strikes-back.html the tao of criminal defense trial lawyering Sun, 21 Mar 2010 02:16:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Defending People » Your Witness . . . No, Not Literally http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/10/the-victimocracy-strikes-back.html/comment-page-1#comment-11463 Defending People » Your Witness . . . No, Not Literally Wed, 11 Nov 2009 03:24:28 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/10/the-victimocracy-strikes-back.html#comment-11463 [...] the shot across his bows, the Harris County DA fires a broadside at Judge Reagan Cartwright Helm, asking him to recuse [...] [...] the shot across his bows, the Harris County DA fires a broadside at Judge Reagan Cartwright Helm, asking him to recuse [...]

]]> By: Mickey Fox http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/10/the-victimocracy-strikes-back.html/comment-page-1#comment-11302 Mickey Fox Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:58:24 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/10/the-victimocracy-strikes-back.html#comment-11302 Who is "John Gault"? LOL But the Federalist papers were merely pro constitutional propaganda and serve no real basis for the interpretation of the founders' (all of them) actual thoughts on the meaning of the Constitution. That being said, I agree with the sentiments though. Who is “John Gault”? LOL

But the Federalist papers were merely pro constitutional propaganda and serve no real basis for the interpretation of the founders’ (all of them) actual thoughts on the meaning of the Constitution.

That being said, I agree with the sentiments though.

]]> By: T.Mann http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/10/the-victimocracy-strikes-back.html/comment-page-1#comment-11144 T.Mann Wed, 04 Nov 2009 04:02:02 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/10/the-victimocracy-strikes-back.html#comment-11144 John, Good point ! John, Good point !

]]> By: JGL http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/10/the-victimocracy-strikes-back.html/comment-page-1#comment-11023 JGL Sat, 31 Oct 2009 12:52:51 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/10/the-victimocracy-strikes-back.html#comment-11023 I have two cases that fall in the "by the balls" category right now. Both are cases of men involved in a divorce and the soon to be ex wives all of a sudden are alleging years of abuse. One in Harris County, and one in Collin County (I know how to pick them!). I'm confident that both will end in acquittals (one was self defense and the other flat out didn't happen), and am even more certain that both should be dismissed. But they won't be. I have two cases that fall in the “by the balls” category right now. Both are cases of men involved in a divorce and the soon to be ex wives all of a sudden are alleging years of abuse. One in Harris County, and one in Collin County (I know how to pick them!).

I’m confident that both will end in acquittals (one was self defense and the other flat out didn’t happen), and am even more certain that both should be dismissed. But they won’t be.

]]> By: John David Galt http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/10/the-victimocracy-strikes-back.html/comment-page-1#comment-10933 John David Galt Fri, 30 Oct 2009 22:33:04 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/10/the-victimocracy-strikes-back.html#comment-10933 Yes, judges should follow the law, but that includes overturning laws which make a joke of "due process of law," or which extend federal authority far beyond any sane reading of the powers granted to Congress as enumerated in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. (And "promoting the general welfare" is not one of them -- Federalist #41 proves this.) Yes, judges should follow the law, but that includes overturning laws which make a joke of “due process of law,” or which extend federal authority far beyond any sane reading of the powers granted to Congress as enumerated in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. (And “promoting the general welfare” is not one of them — Federalist #41 proves this.)

]]> By: John Kindley http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/10/the-victimocracy-strikes-back.html/comment-page-1#comment-10927 John Kindley Fri, 30 Oct 2009 21:26:27 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/10/the-victimocracy-strikes-back.html#comment-10927 I just went to trial on a case a couple weeks ago that illustrates this perfectly. My guy -- a decent man with a good relationship with the mom of his 3 kids -- would have been willing to plead to misdemeanor battery, but the prosecutor was having none of it. Neither the alleged victim nor the client wanted him to be saddled with a felony for the rest of his life -- in Indiana felony domestic battery convictions and child porn convictions are not eligible for reduction to misdemeanor treatment after a year of good behavior. Fortunately, the jury saw the dynamics at play, were not persuaded that there was "bodily injury" (an essential element of the felony conviction) because there wasn't, and voila -- found him guilty of the misdemeanor. But only after a trial in which the "victim," who was honest to a fault, was forced to testify against her fiance. That's gotta be stressful on a relationship, as would have a felony conviction. One would think prosecutors would take things like that into account, but often one would be wrong. I just went to trial on a case a couple weeks ago that illustrates this perfectly. My guy — a decent man with a good relationship with the mom of his 3 kids — would have been willing to plead to misdemeanor battery, but the prosecutor was having none of it. Neither the alleged victim nor the client wanted him to be saddled with a felony for the rest of his life — in Indiana felony domestic battery convictions and child porn convictions are not eligible for reduction to misdemeanor treatment after a year of good behavior. Fortunately, the jury saw the dynamics at play, were not persuaded that there was “bodily injury” (an essential element of the felony conviction) because there wasn’t, and voila — found him guilty of the misdemeanor. But only after a trial in which the “victim,” who was honest to a fault, was forced to testify against her fiance. That’s gotta be stressful on a relationship, as would have a felony conviction. One would think prosecutors would take things like that into account, but often one would be wrong.

]]>