Comments on: “A Case that Cried Out for Someone to Do Something” http://www.bitsbook.com/2009/07/a-case-that-cried-out-for-someone-to-do-something/ Your Life, Liberty and Happiness After the Digital Explosion Sat, 31 Jul 2010 03:55:38 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Jeff Collier http://www.bitsbook.com/2009/07/a-case-that-cried-out-for-someone-to-do-something/comment-page-1/#comment-1774 Jeff Collier Sat, 04 Jul 2009 03:28:09 +0000 http://www.bitsbook.com/?p=462#comment-1774 I'm ;pretty much with you in principle, but wrt the facts of this case, i think we're all pretty much in agreement. She did do something wrong. The jury said she she should rot in prison. I agree. The prosecutor agrees. Missouri made her actions illegal after the fact with a specific law. Even you say she should rot in hell. So why was the case set aside? Because the prosecutor who acted stretched a specific law too far. I agree with you there. But what's wrong with the Law & Order's Jack McCoy tactic? Murder 2 - depraved indifference? Maybe that's a stretch too, but do we really need a new law for every specific crime? Are prosecutors that afraid of pressing a case that doesn't have an exact match statute? Case in point: the new road rage statutes. Whatever happened to driving to endanger? Not staying in yur lane? Do we really need cell phone laws when I know for a fact there's a statute about "failing to use proper care and caution"? Any software engineer or reformed Christian theologian can tell you that detailing every specific wrong action is the road to hell. Sort of sorry for the rant! I’m ;pretty much with you in principle, but wrt the facts of this case, i think we’re all pretty much in agreement. She did do something wrong. The jury said she she should rot in prison. I agree. The prosecutor agrees. Missouri made her actions illegal after the fact with a specific law. Even you say she should rot in hell.

So why was the case set aside? Because the prosecutor who acted stretched a specific law too far. I agree with you there.

But what’s wrong with the Law & Order’s Jack McCoy tactic? Murder 2 – depraved indifference? Maybe that’s a stretch too, but do we really need a new law for every specific crime? Are prosecutors that afraid of pressing a case that doesn’t have an exact match statute? Case in point: the new road rage statutes. Whatever happened to driving to endanger? Not staying in yur lane? Do we really need cell phone laws when I know for a fact there’s a statute about “failing to use proper care and caution”?

Any software engineer or reformed Christian theologian can tell you that detailing every specific wrong action is the road to hell.

Sort of sorry for the rant!

]]>