Friday, May 9, 2008
Now, as I understand it...
...the only evidence against Elsa Newman in her first trial was from a man who had been her attorney at one time in the proceedings.
SO WHAT HAPPENED TO ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE???
And today I have a second question, stemming, doubtless from my lack of knowledge of the law, but still...I need to know this one.
If the results of Elsa's first trial were set aside...abrogated...annulled...abolished
on the basis of the use of her former attorney's testimony, how in the name of all that's holy could she be tried again? Isn't there something called "double jeopardy?" And why doesn't it apply in this case???????
And one more time, the questions that absolutely terrifies me. I've tried all my seventy years to be a law-abiding citizen. On the othe hand, I firmly believe that our system of "justice" is little more than a debating society, and the best debater wins for his/her client, whether said client is innocent or guilty.
And so, one more time, the terrifying question: If this could happen to Elsa Newman, attorney, a wommon confident in the law and its processes, how do I know it cannot happen to me or to someone I love? By golly, I've even got an answer for this one: There is absolutely no way I can know that!!!