Judge Removed From DeLay’s Criminal Trial
DeLay’s request for new judge granted
Part of me can understand that Dick DeGuerin, Tom DeLay’s media whore of an attorney, wouldn’t want his client tried in a court presided over by a Democrat. After all, most Democrats want to see DeLay filleted and braised with a light cream sauce. Lord knows I do. Having said that, however, I find it insulting and patently absurd for DeGuerin and his client to seriously argue that Judge Robert Perkins is incapable of fairly presiding over DeLay’s trial because he has demonstrated to Democratic causes.
Are we now to the point where politicians who run afoul of the law now have the right to ensure that their trials are presided over by a member of their own party? And what does that say about our justice system? If a judge cannot be presumed to be impartial despite his political beliefs, then where are we? Well, we’re where we are with Our Glorious Leader nominating someone like Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. Politics, and now our legal system, are more than ever a zero-sum game. It’s a sorry state of affairs, but there you have it.
In addition to having Judge Perkins recused, DeGuerin is also asking for a change of venue. His argument? That Austin is such a den of depravity, licentious, and Godless Liberalism the largest Democratic outpost in Texas, and as such is particularly inhospitable to DeLay. Hmm…d’ya think the fact that DeLay’s redistricting plan might just have pissed off some of the rest of the state could have an impact here?
If you follow DeGuerin’s logic, the only logical place for DeLay’s trial would be in someplace like Lubbock or Midland, where the locals’ attitudes towards Democrats runs along the lines of “kill ‘em and grill ‘em”. Democrats in and around “Paris on the Prairie” are regarded much like that crazy uncle you keep heavily medicated and locked in the basement. In other words, it’s perfect for DeLay and DeGuerin’s brand of manufactured justice, no?
Listening to DeGuerin’s press conference, I almost found myself choking on my dinner. At least he was gracious in victory, but I am the only one who found DeGuerin’s statement that it was about avoiding “the appearance of impropriety” self-serving and disingenuous in the extreme? No, recusing Perkins really had little if anything to do with fairness. It had EVERYTHING to do with stacking the chips in his client’s favor. Now DeGuerin is free to go judge-shopping. He can sort through judges until he finds one that is ideologically compatible with his client. Of course, this is no guarantee that finding such a judge will work in his client’s favor, and DeGuerin would do well to beware the law of unintended consequences.
Now, all DeGuerin has to do is find a jury of 12 frothing-at-the-mouth, Evangelical, Red Meat Republicans to complete the whitewash. Ain’t justice grand? Yep, she may be blind, but she certainly is easy to manipulate, eh?
