I'm not so sure it is still "fair and just" when it takes so long. If the accused is given more rights, more concern, more everything than the victims and society,
Not commenting on the specific case at hand particularly, but one thing that the accused rarely has more of is
freedom .... particularly in capital cases ...
And it is also rarely the case that the accused has anywhere near the resources as those who are arrayed against him ....
and that is the case with horrible organizations like the ACLU and others, then it is no longer fair and just.
The ACLU is a mixed bag - always has been, and probably always will be ....... they have been both on the right and wrong sides, in various instances, many, may times ..... (IMHO)
To say otherwise is to either be
entirely ignorant of their history and record, or, being aware, just
completely disingenuous ......
Victims, society and honest citizens need at least as many rights as the accused.
Until one has had all the resources and power of the state directed at them, one has absolutely no clue how far the deck is stacked against the accused ..... and how far wrong the administration of justice can go ....
If you don't believe that, then just read some of the case histories of the fellows who were wrongly convicted at the following link:
Innocence Project
In this particular case the convict killed a lawyer while attempting to escape from a courtroom in front of numerous witnesses. He should have been taken out to the courthouse lawn and a bullet put through his head right then and there.
Utterly wrong - in a nation of laws, which has, in it's highest law, the Constitution, the following enumerated right (
also known as the 5th Amendment) that should
never occur ......
ever:
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
Oh no! I've just given a few of our members apoplexy by suggesting the correct handling of such an incident compared to this quarter century of stupidity.
No apoplexy here ...... I'm just enjoying the rather ironic (and somewhat amusing)
utter hypocrisy of someone who would suggest (apparently in earnest) the above method of "justice"....
while having the following in their signature line:
"Support the entire Constitution, not just the parts you like."
Seriously .... I couldn't have made this one up if I had spent the entire rest of my life trying .....
Oh, and before the members who enjoy explaining what I mean get too enthused this is the short version of the abridged report of the condensed comments so it doesn't represent anything except the correct position on this specific incident.
No explanations here ...... none are needed .... your statements stand on their own ......
and out of your own mouth you both condemn, and convict, yourself..... 
