home

Why The Accused Have A Right To A Lawyer

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 09:41:12 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Via Steven D. -- The attorney for accused Ft. Hood murderer Major Nadal Hasan explains what should be obvious to most intelligent people regarding why those accused of crimes are afforded the right to a lawyer. Wolf Blitzer, as we all know, is not among this group:

Blitzer's behavior is inexcusable for a journalist. But it is about par for Blitzer.

Speaking for me only

< Thursday Morning Open Thread | Funding HCR: Reid Considering Raising Medicare Tax On Incomes Of 250K Or More? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Why The Accused Have A Right To A Lawyer | 26 comments (26 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Did you catch Blitzer on Celebrity (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by tigercourse on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 10:38:36 AM EST
    Jeopardy? Guy's lucky he can string two sentences together. Lenny from Laverne & Shirley beat the tar out of him.

    Actually, it was the sidekick on the tonight (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by tigercourse on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 10:43:37 AM EST
    show. But the point stands.

    Parent
    That is the question (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 11:28:08 AM EST
    "How can you defend him? That is the question I got asked the most about representing Timothy McVeigh -- by the media and every single person I encountered back then. My answer to all was the same, just four words. "With pride and dedication."

    I've given many lectures, to lawyers and pubic groups, titled "Representing the Most Hated Man in America: How We Do What We Do."

    Getting asked that question is an opportunity to inform the viewing public of why we defend those considered the lowest among us and other basic tenets of our criminal justice system, from the presumption of innocence on down.

    I think Hasan's lawyer did a fine job (5.00 / 3) (#19)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 11:34:59 AM EST
    I think his reaction to Blitzer's final comments were appropriate and shame on Blitzer.

    Parent
    hell yes (none / 0) (#23)
    by DFLer on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 12:43:44 PM EST
    Blitzen's final comments, mean to me that he was implying that Hasan should be "brutally gunned down" as well....right now!

    Parent
    I've asked defense attorneys that (none / 0) (#24)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 03:57:20 PM EST
    The best answer I got (and from a former prosecutor) was "My job is to make sure the government plays fair."

    Parent
    Really shameful (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Steve M on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 11:28:24 AM EST
    Leave this sort of pandering to the viewers' worst instincts to people like Nancy Grace.

    Unfortunately (none / 0) (#22)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 11:44:16 AM EST
    she has much better ratings than Blitzer, something I'm sure the brass at CNN has noticed.

    Parent
    Ha ha... (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by DancingOpossum on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 11:36:05 AM EST
    I immediately had the same thought about Nancy "He's Guilty!" Grace.
    Wolf said (none / 0) (#1)
    by Radiowalla on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 10:27:04 AM EST
    "a lot of folks, when they heard I was interviewing you,  they asked me...."

    It's the old "some say" technique.

    I doubt that Wolf himself actually believes that Hasan shouldn't have a lawyer.  He did let the Colonel speak at length and he didn't
    interrupt or criticize his answers.  

    Finish the clip (none / 0) (#2)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 10:32:01 AM EST
    You clearly did not hear what Blitzer said a the end.

    Parent
    I did hear the whole clip (none / 0) (#8)
    by Radiowalla on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 10:44:24 AM EST
    and I don't seriously think that Wolf believes that those accused of crimes shouldn't have legal representation.  

    Parent
    Interestingly (none / 0) (#9)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 10:49:54 AM EST
    This is a fine example of goal post moving by you.

    Parent
    For those who did not watch the whole thing (none / 0) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 10:51:28 AM EST
    "Before the interview ended, the CNN anchor said of Hasan, "I'm sure he will get a much fairer hearing than those 13 Americans who were brutally gunned down the other day. I'm sure he will get all of the rights that are applied by the military code of justice."

    Galligan bristled. "The difficulty that I have, of course, is when people end discussions with me with references like the one that you just made.""

    Parent

    Amazing (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by ruffian on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 11:24:31 AM EST
    Someone should remind Wolfie that those 13 people died in the Armed Services defending the Constitution.  If he wants to comment on the irony of that, that's one thing, but to imply that affording someone his Constitutional rights his wrong is another.

    Parent
    I take it back (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by ruffian on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 11:25:53 AM EST
    it is only ironic if you accept Wolf's stupid construct that those people needed a hearing of some sort. He's just ridiculous. I'll leave it at that.

    Parent
    Perhaps it is Wolf attempting (none / 0) (#10)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 10:51:21 AM EST
    to provide a "balanced debate", which has caused so many journalists since the birth of Fox News to say some the of the stupidest things ever documented, but I come away from watching that clip with an idea that we are doing Hasan an unnecessary favor making certain he has the best legal representation we can get for him.

    Parent
    It is pretty obvious frankly (none / 0) (#12)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 10:53:13 AM EST
    I think radiowalla did not watch the clip all the way through.

    Indeed, her first comment misses the objectionable part imo. Instead radiowalla focuses on the part I also find to be not objectionable and rather an invitation for a civics lesson.

    The end of the clip is the problem with Blitzer./

    Parent

    And Fort Hood was a horrible incident (none / 0) (#13)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 11:05:14 AM EST
    but this is not the first time we have experienced fratricide.  Why is Blitzer so hostile?  I would expect this sort of behavior out of the freshly grieving families but not really anybody else.  Is it because of the spotlight and he's just trying to amp his ratings with tea baggers?  Hasan is a United States soldier and all soldiers and their loved ones deserve the clarity that comes with understanding how this all went down.  Hasan deserves his moment to be understood, and I doubt it will improve how this turns out for him.  I pray they don't execute him, but I'm told that life in a military prison is the true definition of hell.

    Parent
    Maybe Wolf was attempting (none / 0) (#18)
    by byteb on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 11:33:42 AM EST
    to emulate the Glenn Beck school of ignorant and idiotic commentary to garner ratings

    Parent
    Amping his ratings (none / 0) (#21)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 11:42:26 AM EST
    with the tea baggers is a good way to put it.  There's definitely been a slight but noticeable change in CNN in recent months in that direction.  I think anchors are being urged by higher-ups to express some anti-liberal thoughts.  I think there are producers egging them on in their earpieces.

    Wolfie isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer (I still don't understand why he has a career), so he's clumsier and more obvious about it.

    I saw that interview when it aired and it made my jaw drop, especially the gratuitous bit at the end, parroting yahoo sentiment.  Terrible.

    Parent

    Yes, the end of the clip (none / 0) (#25)
    by Radiowalla on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 05:55:11 PM EST
    doesn't reflect that well on his journalistic skills.  He should have let the discussion end with a simple "thank you" to Hasan's lawyer.  
    Nevertheless, I still don't believe that Blitzer is suggesting that the accused has no right to a lawyer.  

    Parent
    Now we know (none / 0) (#4)
    by NYShooter on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 10:39:52 AM EST
    why 75% of the students in Oklahoma can't name the first President of the United States

    Wow, so Wolf has already tried him (none / 0) (#5)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 10:40:58 AM EST
    What about the other two shooters though....oh yeah...I forgot....that was what CNN reported but after investigation we discover that there weren't two other shooters.  I have experienced a whole variety of attitudes from military persons about Hasan, but Wolf is the only one so far who doesn't need a trial to take place.

    Well, Wolf, it's this way (none / 0) (#6)
    by Zorba on Thu Nov 12, 2009 at 10:41:07 AM EST
    It's in the Constitution.  We don't just have random crowds, or journalists for that matter, decide that people are guilty and then take the accused out and shoot him or throw him in jail.  What a complete idiot Blitzer is.  It really makes me think that every journalist should have to take a basic test on our system of government before they open their mouths.  But, of course, that would be an infringement of freedom of the press and would be against the Constitution, as well.  ;-)

    Col John P Galligan Interview (none / 0) (#26)
    by Joe Trevino Jr on Fri Nov 13, 2009 at 07:35:36 AM EST
    If Wolf Blitzkreg doesn't believe in the U.S. Constituion and what Galligan is doing as the right thing - he might as while tattoo on his forehead, "I Support Anarchy in the U.S.!"

    Why The Accused Have A Right To A Lawyer | 26 comments (26 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment