- Why so much turnover in mayor's office?
- Hearing on the Ruby Hill towers
- Let freedom ring
- Promoting socialized medicine
- Immigration Laws or Lack Thereof
- Atheist Diversionary Tactics
- The "Melting Pot" is unique to America
- Many mighty hearts covering the world
- Roan Drilling Bad for Colorado, country
- Americans entitled to universal health care
The Line Between Zealous and Overzealous Prosecution
This Speakout has not been edited
By Marc Pappalardo, Boulder
One of the best ways to determine whether a prosecutor’s office has crossed the line between zealous and overzealous prosecution is how they handle the small cases. My criminal traffic case that I recently won illustrates a problem. In a simple illegal left turn traffic case that called for a $100 fine, a Boulder prosecutor ordered and the taxpayers paid for: (i) an officer to take time away from patrolling our streets so he could go back to the scene and measure various distances, (ii) a civil engineer to review my case and consult with another expert, (iii) the same civil engineer to photograph the scene, and (iv) an officer and a City-paid expert witness to testify and sit through the approximately one and a half hours it took for the City to call of all its witnesses at my trial - not mention the expense for the judge, court staff, and prosecutor to play their roles.
What did taxpayers receive for their prosecutor-spent money? The City’s own expert agreed that I would not have seen the sign and that the sign was not placed where the Manual On Uniform Traffic Devices directs. Before trial, I mistakenly believed the prosecutor would dismiss the case after I presented her with photos showing how the sign face wasn’t visible from the road I was on. Instead, I was forced to miss part of a second day of work to go to trial.
Why would Boulder waste so much resources in any minor traffic case not involving an accident? If I faced such overzealous prosecution in a minor case, what can be expected in larger cases? Despite being innocent, I regret not paying the $100 fine to prevent the waste of judicial and police resources that are used to justify tax increases.
Senator Salazar and other Democrats who foolishly express concern about Alberto Gonzales and Bush removing 8 Judges is laughable.
Under Myers v. The United States the Supreme Court ruled that the President has the power to remove appointees without the consent of the Senate.
Instead of playing politics the Democrats should be concerned with real issues.
Sam
Posted by Samuel Crow on March 14, 2007 12:41 PM