Justice Prevails? Only For The Privileged

Did any of you listen to or read James Comey's report on the Clinton e-mails today?  It was scathing.  He laid out in detail all that was done that should not have been. Then he ignored the most important part of the statute concerned - the one that doesn't mention intent, but rather the criminality of carelessness. Just carelessness.

For months judges and prosecutors have been articulating the rule of law concerning her actions.  She should be guilty under several counts. Never mind the constant lying about the number of devices she used and the markings or lack thereof on the documents under question.

Yet she's given a pass.  Obama said she did nothing wrong.  Well, by his standards that would be true.  He who picks and chooses which part of laws on the books he wants enforced and which parts not.  Or he takes executive actions bypassing Congress to advance his own agenda.

Then husband Bill has a little visit with Attorney General Loretta Lynch, the FBI finally interviews Hillary on Saturday and the result of that lengthy investigation is wrapped up by today.  They came to their conclusion that fast after so long.  Wow.

I think Mr. Comey is not the stand up guy he's been described as. I think he caved to Presidential pressure.  I think his career with the FBI is probably stained enough that it might as well be over.

But what I think matters not.  What does is that Hillary's mishandling of government classified, sensitive and top secret information were laid out with damning detail. And the FBI could see no reason to indite or even call for a grand jury to see if charges were warranted.  The FBI then became judge and jury going against the very essence of their findings.

You wonder why I'm having trouble doing this blog?  I just cannot get my head around what our government is doing or why.  The deceit, the lies - not as an exception to the rule.  It is the rule.

This is no longer the country in which I grew up.  It has become as foreign to me as so many other countries in the world that operate for the well being of those in charge rather than the well being of their citizens.

It's tough to write about when I can make no sense of it.

Manipulating To The End

I'm not an advocate of capital punishment but sometimes  the guilty party has so few, if any, redeeming qualities it seems just.  I'm always torn as to whether losing one's life is worse than having to live with what one has done.

In the case of Jodi Arius I've heard both sides argued. In order for there to be any justice in one having to live with their crime they'd first have to have some remorse.  A conscience.  I don't see that Ms. Arius does.  All I see is a woman trying to manipulate even now as she faces her final penalty.

It takes a lot of gall to sit in front of the family of her slain boy friend and plead for her life in order not to hurt her family.  Excuse me?  What about Travis Alexander's family?  If she is put to death she won't begin to suffer as he did at her hand. Either way, her family is going to have to live with what she did. No matter what happens to her, her family will bear that shame just as Travis's family will bear their grief.  I'm having trouble with one deserving more, or less, than the other.

In her own defense she claimed she loved Travis and never wanted to cause his family pain. Strange way to show love. Then she pulled out  dozens of pictures of her family and friends and claimed she didn't commit suicide in consideration of them. All heart, this woman.

She went on to tell of how she could contribute if allowed to live.  Donate her hair for wigs for cancer victims.  How much time between donations?  Hair has to grow back.  She could design T-shirts that would raise money for victims of domestic abuse.  Because of her great artistic talent.  Does she honestly think T-shirts by Jody Arias would be big sellers?  Maybe they would, but I wouldn't buy one and you can bet she wouldn't do it anonymously so that an unsuspecting public wouldn't know. Besides, how may would she design?  Would it really be retribution? It's almost laughable.

The jury can also consider that she has no previous criminal record and that she is a good friend.  How commendable.  On the other hand she wasn't a particularly good daughter and she certainly wasn't a good friend to Travis.

I wondered if I could vote for death for this woman who was so cavalier about it just after she was found guilty.  Now push comes to shove. Her life really is at stake. To me she's now grasping at straws knowing the jury already thinks the brutality her crime meets the criteria for death.

Somehow I can see her smirk should they settle for life without the possibility for parole. In my mind she is the last one who should get any satisfaction from the whole sorry episode.

If At First You Don't Succeed

Every time justice prevails I cheer.  Just as the guilty of murder verdict for abortion monster Kermit Gosnell.  Too often justice does not prevail. When it doesn't I sometimes blame the attorneys and judges more than the defendants.  I think the prosecuting attorney may have come close to losing the Jody Arius case because of his grandstanding except for the fact she is a totally dislikeable person.

Back when O.J. Simpson was on trial for the murder of his ex-wife and her  friend, the prosecution was inept, the defense was flashy, the Judge loved the attention and O.J. was a popular sports hero from his football days.

I don't think anyone thought he was innocent and I don't to this day.  Instead of living up to his promise to search for the real murderer every day of his remaining life, he retired to the golf course with those who still thought he was worth hanging on to and were willing to fund him.

They weren't always the most desirable companions he could have chosen and he ended up getting arrested and convicted on charges of kidnapping and robbery.  He didn't fare well in jail.  He even got beaten to a pulp by a skinhead inmate after hearing him bragging about his sexual prowess with white women.  No one ever accused him of being smart.  Ego can do that to a person.

Now he's back in court with a new legal team in an attempt to get a new trial.  His new attorney claims his former attorney gave him ineffective counsel.  I can understand why Simpson thinks so, that's for sure.  But having paid some $700,000 to said attorney you'd like to think he at least tried though he was a bit on the shady side himself.

When I saw O.J. entering the courtroom on the news I literally gasped.  He may have had some less than pleasant run ins with fellow inmates but he seems to be eating well.  And enjoying having people other than inmates paying attention to him.

Will he get his new trial?  Who knows.  The first witness for the defense is slated to be a psychiatrist.  You can see it coming, right?  Yep.  Diminished capacity of some sort from prior brain injuries from playing football.  He has a whole league of players with concussions to thank for his attorney coming up with this new strategy.

Oh, yeah, in case that doesn't work there's the point he had several vodka/cranberry juice cocktails before the kerfuffle.  They may have further impaired his already shakey judgement. Hey, what ever works!

What In The Name Of GOD??

I hadn't quite finished my coffee this morning so I picked up the current issue of Arizona Highways. Hub said, "Inside the back cover." I turned to the story; a memorial to a young soldier who had written to the magazine asking if they would send copies to his unit to give them something to read and remind them of home.

The staff was so taken by the young soldier's humility and concern for his friends they sent far more then magazines and soon they had a special bond - plus an inside perspective of what war was like in Afghanistan. He was killed January 10, 2010. I was wiping my eyes by the time I finished reading. They were grieving because they would now never meet this young man to say a heart felt "thank you", not only for serving his country but what he gave them.

It reminded me of my own GI who picked up one of many Christmas cards I had sent to his unit, several years ago now. You know, one of those special requests that come around the holidays. He was serving in Iraq. We too have a special bond, a warmth that embraces me, even though we've never met.

The stories of these soldiers brought to mind the story of the father of a young Marine who is suing a group of protesters that invaded the privacy of his son's funeral.

We know people protest any and everything these days. There is something so ugly about this, however, I'm finding it difficult to articulate how I feel. This group is claiming first amendment freedom as they spew their hate. The Supreme Court is going to hear the case. Chief Justice John Roberts has shown in recent days, due to his flap with the President from the State of the Union incident, that he understands the frustration of humiliation.

Beyond the legalities of these actions, is the vileness of them done in the name of God. These people claim to be Baptists and most are relatives of the founder, one Fred W. Phelps, Sr. A crotchety old man who is reveling in the publicity for his cause - spreading hate.

It's hard to grasp how deep this hatred for Catholics and Gays, and who knows what else, runs! How twisted are minds that think the war is "divine retribution" for America's sins!

It's will be a fine line for the Supreme Court to deal with. In the meantime, it seems to me the Baptist Church should denounce this congregation at the very least or forbid them to claim the Baptist Church before it is diminished by their actions.

Short of that they should all be placed under psychiatric observation. No one that hates so deeply they use the funerals of fallen servicemen, those who have died serving their country, to get their message front and center can be considered sane.

It is beneath contempt.

"Failure Is Not An Option"

Have we really come to this? Both the President and the Attorney General have stated, unequivocally, that Khalid Shaikh Mohammad and his co-defendants will be found guilty and executed. What an appalling statement.

It's not just the fear a lot of Americans have about these terrorists being brought to New York City to be tried in Federal Court. It's what the rest of the world is seeing. The reason behind this faulty exercise is to showcase how wonderful our justice system is. How the United States is the shining beacon on the hill of fairness.

Well, perhaps at one time. Whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Even the most heinous of criminals, those we know are guilty, are given that right. So what about these self admitted terrorists? They've already confessed. Because there has to be a trial in a death penalty case even when one confesses. However, with those admissions having been obtained while they were under duress, how will it muddy the pool of evidence?

How can they possibly seat a jury of their peers? Or does that go by the wayside? What if no Muslim is in the jury pool? Would that be reason for appeal? Then add to it all that I've written in previous posts. It's a difficult situation now made more difficult.

It seems we're at a point where we see a decision not being made because Obama is "thinking things through" or a decision being made, credited to an underling, that has provoked a horrendous backlash. The underling, Mr. Holder, is bearing the brunt of the decision.

The troops in Afghanistan are bearing the brunt of the "thinking things through" mode. Now the delay in troop deployment is being extended while an exit strategy is being examined. I'm to the point I want to hear no more about how poorly the Bush administration handled Iraq. Obama is doing no better in his war of necessity.

Yesterday I stated my lack of regard for anything Sarah Palin including the opinion she is not nor ever will be Presidential material. I'm beginning to wonder the same about the man who currently holds the office.

This Guy Isn't A Young Santa!

Forget the beard. Gifts you get from this guy would be better left unopened!

Okay. I'm over my vacation thoughts and am back in my "what can they possibly be thinking" mode. Like the pussy footing around the Fort Hood Massacre in attempt to make it something other than what it was. An Islamic act of terror.

My worry today, however, is the inanity of trying the September 11 terrorists and the mastermind behind it in our civilian courts, in New York City yet! Whoever made this decision is mad. Quite mad. Everyone involved in making it. All of them.

Look at the lead time they have given jihadis and jihadi wannabes already within the country to plan! I do not for one minute believe we can out think these people on how they might breech security.

I envision the entire city grinding to a halt. I envision several possible scenarios. Either the feds will close down the entire city for the duration of an open ended trial or everyone entering the city will have to pass through check points. Can you imagine the nightmare of that alone? Have you ever traveled to New York City? You have airports, bridges and tunnels. Can they all be adequately protected? At what expense?

Then there is the already faltering economy of the city. It would die. Who in their right mind would want to vacation there during that period? There goes tourism. Broadway. Restaurants. Shopping. Attractions. Not to mention services denied people who live there.

What New Yorker in their right mind wants this going on in their backyard?

Then there is the trial itself. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed wants to be his own attorney. That means he has the right to see every bit of classified information we have! That's just dandy. Especially if he happens to be acquitted or sprung by "friends". He could also be assassinated by those same friends to martyr him as a recruiting tool. Or they could cause mischief in other parts of the city, or country for that matter, while all eyes and security are focused on the trial.

Come on. You know how the media is going to act. It's going to be a circus. Like Michael Jackson's trial a few years back, or O.J.'s. And guess what? They both got off! It will only take one juror to deny the death penalty, no matter how strong the evidence. Then, if convicted at all, we'll get to support them for the rest of their lives.

It's time for Obama's apology tour to stop. We are at war. We have no obligation to bear our souls or anything else to anyone! They tell us this is to showcase our justice system to the rest of the world. To show them we're good people and fair. Who thought that up as a necessity? I'll buy into it when the countries these men came from do the same.

Let's change the meaning of "politically correct" to mean we do something that makes sense for this country rather than placating those who hate us!

Once A Comic, Always A Comic

Al Franken has officially been a member of the Senate since July 8th. Eight whole days and nary a peep. Not knowing how assignments are made, I'll just accept the fact he has a seat on the Judiciary Committee currently conducting the Sotomayor hearings.

I'm sure the Democrats helped him formulate the softball questions he would ask. These hearings are such a farce. Why they have to take up all day, everyday of CNN and MSNBC is beyond me. I thought that was the reason C-Span was created. No matter. What is, is.

I'm not much of a Franken fan. The last thing the Senate needs is another comedian, but no matter. What is, is. However, after three days of pontificating Senators and artfully dodging nominee, Franken at least brought a little comic relief.

Sotomayor has said the Perry Mason show inspired her to become a prosecutor. Franken asked her what the name of the one case Mason lost had been. She did not remember. "Didn't the White House prepare you?" he asked.

That last part was the funny part to me! That Franken also did not know didn't surprise me either. That the AP reporter checked it out did.

So here we have it. A new Senator reveals what we all really know anyway. The White House prepares the nominee for the questioning. She probably had all the Democrats questions in advance so there would be no slip up. The Republican questions get so lost in posturing they mean little in the pre-set scheme of things anyway.

The nominee has no quick recall of what might be considered trivia. That would explain a lot of evasions.

A reporter actually researched the answer for an unanswered question. Too bad it wasn't one of more importance. No matter. It's a step in the right direction!

The episode? "The Case of the Deadly Verdict." I wonder if that portends the end of the hearings and just how it will translate!

Who Are The Uighurs And Where The Heck Is Palau?

In Obama's rush to close down Gitmo, he has found himself with a problem. What to do with the detainees. Though one is already in this country for trial, Congress had said none would be allowed. So much for Congress.

A bigger problem concerns those detainees who are of questionable guilt. One such group consists of 17 Chinese Muslims who are not unlike the Tibetans in their desire for independence from China. According to NPR , they were sold to the U.S. military by Pakistani bounty hunters for $5000 per head.

It is now reported by many sources, including Refugee Settlement Watch that two U.S. officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to the Associated Press, said the U.S. was prepared to give Palau up to $200 million in development, budget support and other assistance in return for accepting the Uighurs and as part of a mutual defense and cooperation treaty that is due to be renegotiated this year.

Wow! $200 million of our taxpayer dollars to a small group of islands encompassing approximately 178 square miles with a population of 20,303. It's religious profile is 49% f Roman Catholics, Seventh Day Adventists, the Assembly of God , Liebenzell Mission, latter Day Saints and 33% Modekngei which is their indigenous religion. The missionaries have sure been busy here for their return on recruitment! This place is virtually in the middle of nowhere!

Now on to the Uighurs themselves. Their province, Xinjiang, borders Afghanistan, several of the "stans", Mongolia, Russia, Pakistan and India.

It is chock full of pipelines and is rich with oil, natural gas and mineral resources. No wonder China wants to keep them in tow! To do so they have been flooding the province with non-Muslim immigrants and are allocating to them the best jobs and housing. Gosh, why would this build resentment?

Having been a major stop on the Silk Road, the Uighur converted to Sunni Islam in the 10th century. Between 1933 and 1944 they established their own independent political state, the Islamic Eastern Turkestan Republic, which was soon quashed by the Red Army to aid the Chinese Nationalist forces.

Much like the Tibetans, it should come as no surprise there is a movement afoot to regain their independence.

Which brings us back to our seventeen. They were in neighboring Afghanistan hoping to receive training and return home to join the fight for their homeland. They have been sitting in Gitmo since 2001.

The Chinese want them so they can execute them. Bermuda has raised all sorts of diplomatic nightmares by agreeing to take two on a temporary basis and of course there is the issue of Palau.

Another fine mess! There is a lot of truth in the statement "One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter". Perhaps things would not be so complicated if some discretionary action was taken before tossing people in prison and literally throwing away the keys! There has certainly been no rush to justice here!

As a footnote, if we are in fact willing to pony up $200 million to relocate this small block of detainees, what's it going to cost us to relocate the rest of them? Just think, if the Uighurs should win their fight against China, they may not be able to lend us any more money!

YOU Be The Judge!

All too often a story appears telling of school officials having gone a step too far in the name of protecting their students. The case of a thirteen year old girl who was subjected to a strip search for the alleged offense of passing out prescription strength ibuprofen has made it to the Supreme Court.

On the complaint of one student a school official searched her backpack and found nothing. She was then taken to the nurse's office where she had to shift her under garments, exposing herself. No pills were found.

The question is whether it was or was not an unreasonable search. The school officials had not bothered to search her desk nor her locker. They questioned no other students. So of course the young lady must have hidden the pills in her underwear. They did draw the line at searching her body cavities only because school officials had not been trained on how to do so.

There is a lot to be said as to how this incident was handled at the school level. More interesting to me was the discourse that took place at the Supreme Court.

According to The New York Times the Court spent an hour debating what middle school students are apt to be hiding in their underwear and what should be done about it.

I may be missing something here, but if this case had been on my docket I'd have done a bit of research beforehand. Listening to debate over the "ick" factor versus how logical hiding things in under garments would seem, to learning that kids sniff marking pens to get a high, or learning that when one of the Justices was in school he undressed once a day - for gym class, and "things" often found their way into his underwear! This strikes me as a court of the absurd - and the uninformed.

I fully realize today's youth are far more savvy about drugs then I was at their age. Even now for that matter. Where to get them, how to hide them, even how to use them. Those who appear not to be so savvy are the school officials who don't cover the basics before reacting.

Worse yet is how out of touch the Supreme Court seemed to be on a problem that seems to be uncomfortably common. It provided no comfort that the highest court in the land found themselves uncomfortable with the search but were reluctant to second guess school officials who are often confronted with issues involving drugs.

They say "justice" is blind. In this case there's a bit of deaf and dumb in there too.

A Step Too Far!

According to the International Herald Tribune the Obama administration is going to seek an increase in oversight of executive pay.

Whoa! This is taking the current populist stance way too far. I can understand strict oversight of the companies who have accepted bailout money willingly, but for those whom those monies were forced on or those not involved at all, this is intrusion we will come to regret.

I think what's happening here is the general public is seeing the multi million dollar figures without knowledge of how large corporations conduct their business nor how executive level employees across the board are compensated. The administration is fast approaching European socialism where governments intrude in all things corporate.

I've read hundreds of blogs parroting the outrage of the dollar amounts of the bonuses while the populist are losing their jobs and homes. How many companies other than AIG are handing out similar bonuses? A lot. Is the public equally outraged at this? Are they even aware of it? Has it finally hit home that both Geitner and the Fed were aware of the AIG bonus plan before and complicit with it before the money was distributed? Has it come across that Senator Dodd, who denied putting the clause in the stimulus package allowing the bonus to be paid, did in fact put it in? That he lied? And that Geitner did too by not coming forward with this information?

Let's see where the outrage is for a few other things like the multi million dollar contracts athletes get, not to mention signing bonuses for untried players. How about the cost to tax payers when they're held hostage by team owners who want a new stadium or arena and won't put up the money themselves but threaten to pull the team? Where's the outrage from the people who will never make that kind of money nor get those bonuses nor even attend a game. A game! I won't even get into the money Hollywood puts out for trash! Where's the outrage? All the while this is happening people are still losing their jobs and their homes.

At the moment everything bailout is in a state of chaos. It reminds me a bit of the French Revolution when Marie Antoinette was saying, "Let them eat cake" as the people were starving. The people rebelled and aristocratic heads rolled. A parallel exists here by looking at how the web that has been spun is beginning to strangle those who wove it. That's why I suggested in yesterday's post it's time for Obama to scale back his own big picture agenda and get a handle on what in the grand scheme of things should be a relatively minor blip. Or does he really want this "revolution" to continue fomenting?

Obama should take note of Georges Danton, a revolutionist himself who fell out with Robespierre. He's noted for saying, as he went to meet Madam Guillotine, "La revolution devore ses enfantes." The revolution eats it's own children. What did he do that was so egregious to the more extreme of his own kind? He was not a fanatic and was capable of moderation and genuine reason.

This is how I view Obama. However, if he doesn't start leading, the more extreme segments of his own party as well as we, his people may begin a revolution he'll not be able to contain. Maybe now is the time for some heads to roll!

Police Guild = Justice Denied

There are days when I just don't get it! You read time and time again about zero tolerance policies, especially in our schools. A little kid who may have a GI Joe with a gun tucked in the innards of his back pack is expelled. A disruptive eight year old is led off in handcuffs because a teacher felt threatened. By an eight year old girl!

Sex offenders have to register even if the crime was sex between a nineteen year old and his sixteen year old girl friend.

Appointees to high government positions pay their taxes only when the job may be at stake.

Now, the Spokane Police Department is back in the headlines. An officer gets reinstated with back pay after arbitration ruled firing was too stiff a penalty. For what? For driving his city assigned car after having been drinking and using his city issued cell phone to snap pictures of a bare breasted woman then having sex with her in her car.

According to arbitration, the penalty was too stiff. He deserved punishment but not dismissal.

Here's Dogwalk's take. There was no policy regarding cell phone pictures. Come on! It was city property. A Mayor was ousted for cruising gay web sites on a city computer!

He was nowhere near legally intoxicated. Just when was he tested? He's a police officer for crying out loud! What can I say?

Excited about his reinstatement he let it be known he didn't want to work anywhere else. Who can blame him? Spokane police, time and time again get a free pass! I give a thumbs up to Chief Kirkpatrick for firing him; a thumbs down for saying "That's our system of justice and I respect that." As for the officer, Spokane is welcome to him.

Unions. They protect athletes who cheat. They demand concessions that reduce companies to the verge of bankruptcy. Think baseball and the auto industry as examples. They protect police officers from punishment for behavior that would have landed the rest of us in jail.

Isn't it time we reassess the zero tolerance rules now on the books before somebody really gets hurt?

Is Blind Justice Also Deaf And Dumb?

This is the second time in as many years Hub has been tapped for jury duty. Last go round he was shocked to find out that no transcript was available for use during deliberations. Because of that and memory issues of the jurors the result was a hung jury.

Yesterday he was not chosen to sit on the panel but he had an equally disturbing tale to tell of the proceedings prior to jury selection. The case was a complex one. A doctor was being sued for an incident that resulted in the loss of a life. The particulars are not as important as the procedures.

Now here's Hub. A man in his sixties who has no children. Medical terminology, especially most things having to do with women, is a foreign language to him. He had never heard of the type of incident that had caused the death. Yet had his name been drawn he could have served.

He's a smart guy and would have followed the proceedings with no trouble but it would have been a definite learning curve. How many others that were chosen would have the same issue? I would guess most.

Just what exactly is a jury of one's peers anyway? Would it be people who had the same experience or members of the medical community with a different point of view? Certainly members of the public that have no idea of what's being discussed shouldn't qualify. But they do. They have to. There are only so many potential jurors to go around. It certainly puts a tremendous burden on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt!

Once empaneled jurors seem to take their task quite seriously, as well they should, but I wonder at there not being a transcript available for reference. Even with avid note taking by individual members of the jury, what they think they heard may vary from member to member.

Take me. I can't sit for long periods because of back pain. I'd be spending more time fidgeting to find a position of comfort than I would listening, what's more concentrating. I don't hear so well any more. My eyes aren't what they used to be. If a detail was sticky I'd sure want that transcript to rely on for accuracy.

They keep raising the age and shortening the time between service for jury duty in this area. While I know many who have lived here far longer than we have never been called, we have several times over. Random selection so we've been told. I'll accept that premise with reluctance. I would guess they rely on retirees to a great extent because the five to ten dollars a day they pay doesn't make up for a much needed day's pay for a bread winner, small business owner or the self-employed.

All that being said, trial by jury is a right. I just think the jurors should be given all the help possible to reach a fair and just verdict. Having a transcript of the proceedings available should be a given.

Is There Something To Be Said For The Death Penalty?

For those of you who don't live in this area, the biggest ongoing news story is the sentencing phase of the Joseph Duncan murder trial taking place in Boise. Murder seems to be in the air around here and it's leaving an unpleasant, to say the least, stench. Recently a young couple was found murdered in a remote area know best to Huckleberry hunters. They've left behind an infant son. So far four people have been arrested in conjunction with the crime. Why? What motivate such actions? What will ultimately happen?

Duncan has admitted to the slaying of a mother and her teenage son, her male friend with whom they were living, and kidnapping two younger children, one of whom was also murdered. It rocked the community then and the sentencing phase is rocking it now.

I started blogging just about the time the murders happened. The somewhat ghoulish reason was that I learned Duncan had a blog. It sent me scurrying to blogspot to see just what the craze was all about. What I found was a lot of stuff of little interest and a lot of stuff that was extremely disturbing.

When I decided to see if I could attract readers as one of those with little of interest, I found I needed to generate some kind of exposure. That's when I contacted Dave Oliveria, master mind behind the Spokesman Review's Huckleberries Online. He asked me a lot of questions which I was reluctant to answer. The reason was obvious. I didn't want to reveal too much of myself on the web. Boy, have I thrown that caution to the wind!

The local blogosphere covered the Duncan crime from far more angles than the press. People were glued to the story. The same holds true now. To the point of maintaining a Twitter site for instant updates. People want to see this man gone. These weren't the only kids that suffered from his depravity, but they were the locals!

I have chosen not to read any of it even though it hits me in the face at every turn. The recollection of the previous coverage hasn't faded enough and I haven't the prurient interest for the blow by blow details. To me that belongs in the court room. The lawyers, the judge and the jury have to watch and listen to it. I do not.

Will the final verdict be death or life in prison? I've always had a struggle with it. It brought to mind, however, a Washington state case from the early '90s where another child molester was sentenced to death. Wesley Allen Dodd. There is a certain similarity to their faces. Especially the eyes. I think it must be some version of self-loathing.

During the sentencing phase of Dodd's trial, he was asked if he thought, given the opportunity, he would ever commit such crimes in the future. He said that he couldn't and wouldn't guarantee that he wouldn't repeat his crimes if he got the chance. Furthermore, he stated that if he were ever to get out of prison, he considered it highly likely that he would once again rape and kill other young boys. And he would enjoy it just as he had before.

Not so very different than the spread sheets Duncan had made listing the pros and cons of his crimes.

In discussing my battle with anxiety, I've had more than one doctor tell me it's just the way I'm wired. These men, it would seem, have a wiring problem too. I can help my short circuits with medication. They've chosen a different path. Of course there is a huge difference between my problem and theirs. The similarity, though, is we both know we have it. I prefer to treat mine. The pleasure they derive from theirs outweighs, no, obliterates rational thought.

In an odd sense, perhaps it's a blessing to them to put them out of their misery. It must be a horrible way to live, constantly fighting such vile demons and always losing.

I don't know. It's still taking a life. Yet, on the other hand...