O/T - Judge Declares Mistrial in Clemens Case

[Peter_Spaeth]

I suspect he will be retried. The prosecutors should have been more careful but that evidence was almost certainly coming in on rebuttal anyhow because the defense would have attacked Pettite's credibility.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I suspect he will be retried. The prosecutors should have been more careful but that evidence was almost certainly coming in on rebuttal anyhow because the defense would have attacked Pettite's credibility.

That won't be a basis to allow a retrial to go forward. An order is an order and the prosecutors were idiots and overzealous. This is what prosecutors are. They're always looking for the next job, hoping to use a high-profile conviction to further their goals.

[Peter_Spaeth]

And all defense attorneys, naturally, are extremely scrupulous.

[calvindog]

No, but we're not responsible for charging people with crimes or requesting punishment. We also don't have the constitutional requirement to turn over exculpatory information about our case. So, defense lawyers aren't held to the same standard as prosecutors. Too often prosecutors are focused on just winning and not dispensing justice.

[tbob]

Originally Posted by calvindog

No, but we're not responsible for charging people with crimes or requesting punishment. We also don't have the constitutional requirement to turn over exculpatory information about our case. So, defense lawyers aren't held to the same standard as prosecutors. Too often prosecutors are focused on just winning and not dispensing justice.

+1. Well said.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by calvindog

That won't be a basis to allow a retrial to go forward. An order is an order and the prosecutors were idiots and overzealous. This is what prosecutors are. They're always looking for the next job, hoping to use a high-profile conviction to further their goals.

I found Jeff's comment especially interesting in light of what our Michigan case law states their duty to be: to see that the interests of justice are served, and not simply to gain a conviction. In more than 30 years of practice in appellate law, both civil and criminal, I can't recall even a single prosecutor who conducted himself in that manner. Rather, their approach has unfailingly been to gain a conviction at any cost, and I'm sure their promotions and pay hikes are linked to their conviction rates (as well, of course, as their political ambitions). Perhaps this was just one more example of such motivation at work.

And with regard to Peter's comment, let me state that I've always felt that my role on the defense side is to protect the integrity of the system; to keep it not only intact but vibrant, vital and alive, in order that the first innocent among us to be wrongfully brought up on criminal charges will have all of the protections of his rights the system was intended to afford to him.

Best wishes,

Larry