Constitutional Law

Events

I've been offline for a few days due to work and personal matters. Update:

Thursday I attended Judge Roll's visitation and rosary. There were quite a few (as in hundreds) attendees, and tightest security I have ever seen, down to deputy riflemen on the church's roof.

Friday I tried to attend his funeral mass. Tried, because there were several thousand attendees, and the couple that I know that got in showed up three hours early. I parked a good quarter mile off -- not only the church parking lot was filled, but every street for that distance. Walking, I met groups returning, because they had been turned back; there simply was no more room, and this may be the largest RC church in southern Arizona. My sister and brother in law found there was a shuttle bus running from a location about a mile away but they, too, were turned back. Newspapers said that several thousand showed up for the funeral mass. Yes, he was that respected here. He really was a judge who went by the law, exclusively. I couldn't tell you anything about his politics, because I knew him mostly from the courtroom, and his politics and personal preferences had absolutely nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with his legal rulings.

My friends who got in said the funeral sermon was given by Msgr. John Lyons. He'd been Judge Roll's classmate in elementary and high school, and had been my moot court partner in law school (he practiced law before becoming a priest).

Saturday I attended the ABC town hall meeting that was shown on Sunday. I briefly saw the guy who was chucked out and arrested. I heard him shout behind me, and turned to see two deputies taking him out. He was busted for disorderly conduct and threats. A tea party spokesman had said that maybe we ought to delay debating gun control until at least after the funerals, and this fellow, who had been making appearances calling for gun control) snapped his picture and said "you're dead!" (I didn't see or hear that part of it). Rather ironic, I thought. A woman near me said the guy must be pretty weird. Before the meeting he had passed his business card to her and others (a bit tacky, I would say) and babbled about playing tennis, so she thought he was a bit of a mental case. News reports had said he was shot in the knee by the killer, but he was on both feet and not limping when the deputies escorted him out, and is said to have driven himself to the hospital, so I suspect it was a nick.

The guest included the retired colonel who was the first to tackle the shooter, and the lady who grabbed the magazine away from him. The colonel said that when he and another guy got the killer down on the ground, the killer exclaimed that they were hurting him, the colonel suggested to the other guy that they could let up, and the other guy responded no way!

Local legal conversation is that running with the Federal charges first is a mistake, and probably an FBI publicity grab. (1) The insanity defense is the likely defense, and while the Feds have a modified M'Naughton "not guilty by reason of insanity" defense, Arizona has "guilty but insane," which means the defendant goes to a mental institution, and when release from that goes to prison to finish his sentence. (2) Arizona has a "natural life" sentence, meaning a real life sentence, he leaves the prison when he dies. I don't know if the Feds so. (3) Proving murder one in Arizona involves proving just that. The Federal crime is murder of a government official, which requires proof in addition that the victim was on official duty. Gabby Giffords was clearly on duty, but it'd only be attempted murder. Judge Roll would be murder, but it may be hard to prove he was on official duty if he hadn't already started speaking to the Representative within hearing of witnesses, and had brought up court business. Odds are that he was indeed there to speak about the needs of the court, or to thank her for past concern shown, but proving that beyond a reasonable doubt may be a problem.

So the Federal charges may be harder to prove than the State ones would be, the Federal insanity defense is much more effective, and the State sentencing options are better. It'd be better to go with the State charges first, or to go with them exclusively.

Full post as published by Of Arms and the Law on January 18, 2011 (boomark / email).