American justice | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's Note: Jim Bispo's weekly column appears in the Beaufort Observer.

    Did you ever hear of a young man named Trayvon Martin before a year and a half ago or so?? Not likely. His death was truly a sad event. The local Sheriff in the jurisdiction where Trayvon was shot declined to prosecute the shooter reportedly for lack of evidence. It was only after a lot of rabble rousing and protest marches that the arrest was made and charges filed. The Sheriff sincerely believed that he was right even to the point of resigning when it became clear that there was going to be a politically (not to mention racially) motivated arrest and prosecution in this case. Sure enough, there was. But guess what, either the sheriff was right or the prosecution was so inept that the jury came up with a "not guilty" verdict. The "marchers" and "protesters" were not happy with the verdict and have continued their denigration of the justice system. We see a lot of folks marching around in circles demanding "justice" for Trayvon. Presumably that means a conviction instead of an acquittal. (Where do you suppose all these folks were when OJ got acquitted??) The noise was so loud that even Eric Holder (who seems to have an hearing impediment when it comes to hearing anyone other than the skin merchants.) heard it and put the FBI on the case with the avowed purpose of bring charges under a Civil Rights statute. So far that doesn't seem to have panned out either. And yet...Other than taking on the order of a year to bring the court case to close, the justice system seems to have worked. If seemingly orchestrated protests and marches (you can always tell by the professionally printed signs they carry) and speeches by Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson result in a reversal, we may as well get rid of the courts and most of those who are charged with enforcing the laws. Turn "Justice" over to the skin merchants.

    Well, maybe we shouldn't have to get rid of it entirely. Maybe all we need to do is make a few changes.

    On 11/05/2009, We see a terrorist at Fort Hood pull out a gun and shoot up the place. He shouts "Allahu Akbar" as he is gunning down virtually defenseless G.I..s. (As I understand it, they are not allowed to carry weapons in or to the area in which the Major opened fire on them) The Anointed One dishonors those who were killed or wounded by allowing his troops to declare the incident "workplace violence". (Seemingly anything goes when it comes to avoiding saying anything unpleasant about the perpetrators of terrorism.) Here it is several years later and we have just finished the trial to determine his guilt or innocence. Guilt or innocence?? What else could the jury say except "guilty" (which they did)?? Give me a break. Is there any doubt that the formerly clean shaven Major was the perpetrator?? Short answer: no. Probably the worst thing that happened at Ft. Hood on that fateful day three or four years ago was that the perp only got wounded. The trial finally got under way. (Here it is Aug, 2013 - That sounds a lot like 34 months between the act and the trial.) Is this simply another of the legal professions' ways to ensure continued employment?? It sure looks suspicious. And now that the death sentence has finally been handed down, we are told that it may be years before all the appeals are exhausted and the sentence can be carried out. So what's wrong with that picture??

    Another equally egregious situation was the shooting of Rep. Gabriel Giffords as she was holding a "constituent" meeting on Jan. 8, 2011 in front of a supermarket in the Tucson area. There was absolutely no doubt who it was who walked up and shot her in the head and then proceeded to kill several of the folks attending the meeting and wound a number of others. His name was (and is) Jared Lee Loughner. In this case, federal charges were filed (maybe the Feds didn't think the AZ folks were up to the job - or perhaps they were concerned that he might be convicted and sent to Sheriff Arpaio's jail"). In any case, Loughner was sentenced on Nov. 8, 2012, only 22 months after he committed this terrible crime.

    Let me take a page out of Al Sharpton's and Jesse Jackson's "book". The Anointed One's administration seems to be favoring the Muslim terrorist (workplace killer) over the American killer. That is outrageous.. Neither deserves any consideration!!

    There are a lot of folks who believe that when there is absolutely no doubt as to who the perpetrator is, the next thing to happen after they are incarcerated should be sentencing - followed shortly thereafter by carrying out the sentence.. That would not likely be resisted by many folks other than the attorneys who somehow manage to drag out cases like these seemingly forever (surely "ringing the cash register" each time final disposition of a case is delayed).

    Surely this suggestion is not going to make many Defense lawyers happy, but so what?? Wrapping themselves in the American flag and demanding justice for clients like Loughner and Hasan (yes, I know he represented himself) has reached the point where it has become an outrage. We can only wonder how a lot of them can even sleep at night...

    And now we are hearing that the delay in bringing anyone to justice over the Benhgazi murders is going so slowly because we are planning to try the "perps" in a U.S. criminal court (with all the U.S. protections we accord our own alleged criminals). It apparently takes more time to get all the ducks in a row for a U.S. criminal trial than it does for a "terrorist" trial. It begins to look as though the Anointed One and his minions at the DoJ are more interested in "playing law" than they are in seeing justice done.

    D'ya think??