Child Rapist Goes Free Because Court Can't Find Interpreter, page 1

WAIT A MINUTE folks, think about this another way; We do NOT have all the facts. How long has the man been sitting in jail? How many attempts has the Prosecution made to find an interpreter?

Here is the REAL issue: It is called : DUE PROCESS . EVERY person, no matter how heinous the crime that he is ACCUSED of committing , is entitled to a fair trial, yes? We can all agree on that. If a man cannot speak and tell his side of the story, and cannot consult with his attorneys, then he CANNOT get a fair trial.

What would you do? Hang him because the Prosecutors SAY they have evidence? No evidence has been presented in court, therefore there IS NO evidence. The headline is terrible and misleading; the man was ACCUSED of a crime or crimes, not convicted, so he is an ACCUSED and you cannot call him a child raper or anything else. What if YOU were in some African nation, accused of rape or another serious crime. Let's say that the court told you that they could not find any lawyers there that spoke English and no one in the court could understand you, but you were going to be tried anyway!! You would be outraged, and so should you now.

I am a father of three kids and I think anyone convicted for such atrocities should be imprisoned for life ( the death penalty in this nation is a travesty ) and never ever allowed to be free again. But DUE PROCESS means that occasionally, a guilty person will escape justice. It happens. It hurts a lot when it is a case like this, with supposed victims, but still we CANNOT make even ONE exception. Know why? Because the NEXT exception we make might just be YOU and you might not really be guilty.

Only a trial can determine guilt, not the charges ..that is plain and a fact.To label ANYONE as guilty, or even likley guilty, is wrong and a betrayal of the system we rely on. I am certain that every effort was made to find a way to give this man a fair trial, and when that could not be done in a timely fashion, they had NO CHOICE but to dismiss the charges. Would you say " Let the guy rot in jail until we find an interpreter, even if it takes years"? That is a total violation of the Constitution and the law.

A speedy trial is mandated so that the government cannot just throw people in jail and leave them there for years while they take their sweet time getting their act together. Can't you see the danger? Suppose the evidence was weak, the Prosecutor would have every reason to leave the poor accused soul in jail indefinitely, to avoid having to try a weak case or let the person go and show how lame the charges were to begin with.
Place yourself in the shoes of every person you hear about being charged; you would want a fair and speedy and impartial trial and you would have to speak with your attorneys to plot a defense and to testify you would need interpreters who are certified.

The courts cannot just grab some Joe off the street and make him interpret because no one else could be found. Interpreters must be specially trained, as attorneys will rely on transcripts and absolutely accurate translations for their work and possible appeals. The translation must not only be accurate, but the translator must be familiar with the syntax of ther language, possible variations on words ( such as " The act at the theatre was a bomb ", and : " There was a bomb at the theatre"), etc. Colloquialisms must be known and understood, etc. If a person has a language that is so hard to find a translator for, then the time to think about allowing these people into this nation is BEFORE they get charged with a crime and have to be released due to lack of ability to provide DUE PROCESS , not after.

It is typical for the Prosecutors to say that they have all kinds of evidence when they know that they are never going to actually have to SHOW the evidence; for all we know the DNA showed nothing incriminating at all. Until presented in court, the PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE is all that protects US from someone assuming that the cop's and prosecutors are always right and that a conviction is just a formality.

That is NOT America, that is NOT a free nation. Sure, once in a while a bad guy gets away; even a really bad guy. But better that than to have everyone assume that guilt is assumed because of information released outside of a trial. You have ANY idea how many innocent people have been falsely accused? Millions, thats how many. Maybe this guy did committ these awful crimes, maybe he didn't. We will never know because the State failed to provide this man with DUE PROCESS and without it we are all in danger, we are all at risk, we can all be falsely accused and made to suffer. But when the trial comes, then your side has the chance to refute the accusation.

Without that chance to refute, there is NO justice. Without a trial that is fully in accordance with DUE PROCESS there can be NO justice at all.And do NOT assume that some liberal judge did this after a few minutes thinking about it. I bet the process has dragged on and on and finally it became plain that the trial could not proceed due to lack of DUE PROCESS protections. Any trial would have been a sham and totally one sided and THAT is not our system, that is NOT justice. Either they will deport this guy for some manufactured reason, and if they cannot, then he will be watched and surveilled anywhere he goes, I am sure.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater; do not throw away DUE PROCESS that is necessary to us all in order to try and convict a man that has no chance at a fair trial. He is PRESUMED INNOCENT, and to label him as guilty without a trial is to play into the hands of those who would take due process away, like the Cheney/ Bush crime gang. We NEED due process, it is an integral part of our system, and even as it let's a POSSIBLY guilty party escape now and then , far better that than the assumption of guilt and the abrogation of our rights for the expedience of a trial without a chance of being fair or just; a kangaroo court with it's mind already made up.

Try and see the big picture, we do not want to cut off our noses to spite our faces, do we? Let us never do away with Constitutional protections in order to assuage outrage and anger at alleged crimes, even of a terrible nature. To do so endangers all of us in ways that cannot be measured until the curtain has fallen and all rights are up for grabs in the name of ' vengeance' or ' justice '.