- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Andrew Weissmann's intentional ignorance on checks and balances.
Posted on 4/29/24 at 9:34 pm to Indefatigable
Posted on 4/29/24 at 9:34 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
My reply wasn’t intended to be adversarial. I’d wager you and I land in the same corner on the merits of Trump’s charges. Though I don’t think the severity of the criminal charge is relevant to the core constitutional analysis.
I get all that and don’t doubt any of it. Which is why I felt the need to point out that the hypothetical wasn’t actually yours. So I suppose I may have ultimately been responding to the original post with that murder example, via your own response. So the question becomes……why didn’t I just reply to the original comment with the murder example? Answer: I have no idea.
But while I’ve got you on the “severity of the crime” aspect - the very fine art of application of discretion within the bounds of criminal investigation and prosecution is perhaps the most paramount aspect of the entire process. That’s literally where it all begins. The decision to “wield” that great authority and to implement the heavy force and authority that goes along with it. Not to mention the whole process ain’t exactly free or cheap.
As I’m certain you’re aware there are too many factors to possibly think of in a single sitting - both general ones and case specific ones - that may apply in a given matter. Many, many considerations of which a number of significant ones probably come to mind for you almost immediately…..severity of the situation likely being one of them.
Anyhow, much too long story made short, this sure seemed like a tailor made situation meriting restraint in that discretion as opposed to the actual aggressive decision that’s come to pass. Of course that’s a matter of opinion, for which mine counts for exactly zero. But as the days go by
I can’t help but feel like mine is being born out by problems piling up stemming from those discretionary decisions.
This post was edited on 4/29/24 at 9:45 pm
Posted on 4/30/24 at 7:07 am to davyjones
quote:
But while I’ve got you on the “severity of the crime” aspect - the very fine art of application of discretion within the bounds of criminal investigation and prosecution is perhaps the most paramount aspect of the entire process. That’s literally where it all begins. The decision to “wield” that great authority and to implement the heavy force and authority that goes along with it. Not to mention the whole process ain’t exactly free or cheap.
That's exactly why the hypotheticals start with a potential state charge for murder. It really tightens the gap on the discretion angle, due to the severity of the crime.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News