The Commutation
The Washington Post editorial board feels that the President showed Scooter Libby "Too Much Mercy." We tend to disagree, and not because we are any fans of this administration.
Obstruction of justice should only be a crime if a crime has occurred. Since there was no underlying crime, what anyone questioned in this case should have gotten was an apology for the inconvenience of being bothered by federal agents, not a witch hunt.
Of course, readers of this blog and the related book know that we would not criminalize much and in the event crimes are committed due to drug addiction, alcoholism or mental illness the solution would be treatment for the minimum sentence or until the person is able to maintain in society without probable relapse. There would be less in the way of prosecution, as most would stipulate to the particulars of the incident and the prosecutor would be forced to accept the bona fide diagnosis of addiction or mental illness. In other words, there would be no justice to obstruct unless police manufactured evidence or doctors lied about the diagnosis. However, it would be assumed that crazy people will lie about events.
We also do not believe in political crime, especially political crimes perpetrated by alcoholics, which by all accounts includes Mr. Libby.
This is one reason we agree with commutation rather than pardon. We would hope that Mr. Libby's probation officer notes his high tolerance for alcohol, which is an indicator of alcoholism, and requires that he abstain and attend meetings. Another reason is that losing his law license with the conviction will put him in the company of another noted grand jury liar, who lost his license in Arkansas for lying about sex.
Mr. Bush is to be complimented for his reasoning in this matter, weighing both sides of the pardon v. commutation question and coming up with the right answer. It is amazing what he can do when he leaves Mr. Cheney out of the process. He should take not of that.
Obstruction of justice should only be a crime if a crime has occurred. Since there was no underlying crime, what anyone questioned in this case should have gotten was an apology for the inconvenience of being bothered by federal agents, not a witch hunt.
Of course, readers of this blog and the related book know that we would not criminalize much and in the event crimes are committed due to drug addiction, alcoholism or mental illness the solution would be treatment for the minimum sentence or until the person is able to maintain in society without probable relapse. There would be less in the way of prosecution, as most would stipulate to the particulars of the incident and the prosecutor would be forced to accept the bona fide diagnosis of addiction or mental illness. In other words, there would be no justice to obstruct unless police manufactured evidence or doctors lied about the diagnosis. However, it would be assumed that crazy people will lie about events.
We also do not believe in political crime, especially political crimes perpetrated by alcoholics, which by all accounts includes Mr. Libby.
This is one reason we agree with commutation rather than pardon. We would hope that Mr. Libby's probation officer notes his high tolerance for alcohol, which is an indicator of alcoholism, and requires that he abstain and attend meetings. Another reason is that losing his law license with the conviction will put him in the company of another noted grand jury liar, who lost his license in Arkansas for lying about sex.
Mr. Bush is to be complimented for his reasoning in this matter, weighing both sides of the pardon v. commutation question and coming up with the right answer. It is amazing what he can do when he leaves Mr. Cheney out of the process. He should take not of that.
posted by Michael Bindner at 10:29 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home