afitzy
Former Member
- Joined
- May 12, 2019
- Messages
- 11,285
- Reaction score
- 126,557
Love this quote from above article:To be fair, Pattis made his complaints about Connecticut’s criminal justice backlog as part of a specific argument against sequestered voir dires, but there is nonetheless something unpleasantly paradoxical about his current desire to tie up a judge and a courtroom for a case with no defendant and no body.
Colin McEnroe: ‘We’re not allowed to give up on anybody’
The piece included such observations as “When I tell friends in other states how long it takes to get to trial in Connecticut, they are stunned,” and “once (a case) arrives on the trial list it sits, sometimes for years, until it is assigned a trial judge.”
The author is Norm Pattis who currently thinks it would be a good idea to continue trying the murder case of Jennifer Dulos, even though his former client Fotis Dulos is dead and the body of Jennifer Dulos has never been found.
To be fair, Pattis made his complaints about Connecticut’s criminal justice backlog as part of a specific argument against sequestered voir dires, but there is nonetheless something unpleasantly paradoxical about his current desire to tie up a judge and a courtroom for a case with no defendant and no body.
His argument is that Fotis Dulos deserves the chance to clear his name and that the five Dulos children deserve the peace that would softly descend upon them after a Pattis-orchestrated acquittal of their father.
My counter-argument is that peace will be long in coming to the tragic lives of those children and that a courtoom is an unlikely place for them to find it. Perhaps the judge and the trial apparatus could be freed up to handle some of the cases of defendants who are imprisoned for long periods without trial because of our monstrously unfair bail system. Perhaps Pattis could be freed up to apply his talents to some other needy client, such as professional thing-under-a-rock Alex Jones.[BBM]
AMEN.
MOO