15 thoughts on “Sheriff Dupnik’s Irresponsibility”

  1. If I was a juror, I would find it difficult to fit his public testimony with the evidence in the case. Considering this disparity, do you believe the evidence are the facts or is the testimony of a principle investigator the facts? If only the former and not the latter, yet the latter collected the former; you have a very serious problem with the foundation of the case.

    Then, there is also the problems brought by Andrew in relation to the insanity defense. But I’m not sure at this point who is more insane. As you write, Rand, the partisan antics have become irrational.

  2. Considering this disparity, do you believe the evidence are the facts or is the testimony of a principle investigator the facts?

    Is he in fact the principle investigator? According to this NPR story,

    Hundreds of FBI agents are working on an investigation aimed at understanding why a former community college student, with no history of violence, went on a shooting rampage outside a Tucson, Ariz., supermarket last weekend. The suspect, Jared Loughner, 22, allegedly killed six people, gravely wounded Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) and injured 13 others as he opened fire during a political event at a local shopping center on Saturday morning.

    Inside the FBI, the investigation is known as a “Bureau Special,” which means that agents from across the country are being called in to help gather evidence and construct a timeline of Loughner’s movements in the days and weeks before the attack. Investigators tell NPR that they are trying to understand what motivated Loughner to lash out.

    If true (you always have to ask yourself that about any press report), it sounds like the sheriff has been told to go play with himself while hundreds (!) of FBI agents are conducting the real investigation. Sounds like the sheriff has too much time on his hands and too much access to microphones. Of course, it’s reasonable to ask why “hundreds of FBI agents” are investigating this case when the shooter was grabbed on the scene. Given that the FBI only has about 13,000 agents in the bureau, that seems a waste of scarce resources.

  3. Being a mass murderer of this type is almost the definition of insanity. There was no rational personal gain to be had, the guy was obviously crazy. And yet many may seek punishment over cure/protective custody.

    I recall an interesting case in New Zealand where a narcissistic academic brutally murdered his ex girlfriend by stabbing her 200 odd times. The guy was blatantly nuts but no one, including the legal system, wanted to forgive him on insanity grounds, he was sent to jail for a very long time.

    I am not saying that this is a bad thing, at a certain level people should be held responsible for their own insanity and a bad person is a bad person independent of insanity. But it is interesting and perhaps appropriate that the insanity defense does not actually get applied to people who are completely and fundamentally criminally insane.

  4. From what I’ve read on another website (always taken with a degree of doubt), Arizona doesn’t have a “not guilty by reason of insanity” category. Instead, he can be ruled “guilty but insane,” an important distinction. If someone is “not guilty by reason of insanity”, they can be released at any time they are ruled sane. However, someone who is ruled “guilty but insane” goes to a mental institution and if later ruled sane, goes to prison.

    Keep in mind that all we know about the guy is from info we’ve received from the press – the same press that on the day of the shooting said the congresswoman was dead. If I literally took everything I read from the press with the proverbial grain of salt, I’d probably die of high blood pressure.

  7. Larry, I was relying on the article, “a”. I heard the FBI is investigating. But like you, a hundred agents? Usually, they work with local law enforcement to augment their number on the scene. If augmenting, then it is likely some of the evidence would be obtained by work performed by the Sheriff’s department. If nothing else, the FBI wasn’t the first on the scene.

  8. By the way, credit where credit is due. The parts of the President’s speech I read (in NRO) were very good, explicitly rejecting attempts to invent simple and politically convenient explanations for these murders. He couldn’t have been clearer right here:

    And if, as has been discussed in recent days, their deaths help usher in more civility in our public discourse, let’s remember that it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy — it did not.

    Well done, Obama.

  10. I read that article about how a line in Obama’s speech may undercut the federal charge about the judge’s murder. Personally, the assertion seems weak but I’m certainly no lawyer (I prefer honest work like playing piano in a whorehouse).

    Last weekend, the feds stated that the judge went to speak to the congresswoman about immigration issues, meaning he was on official business as supposedly required for the federal charge. Last night, Obama said he was making a social call to see a friend, meaning he wasn’t on official business. Those seem mutually exclusive conditions – the judge was either on official business or he wasn’t. If he was, there may be some evidence to support the claim and the prosecutors can make the assertion that Obama was misinformed or he misspoke. On the other hand, if Obama was right in his speech there is apparently no legal grounds for the federal charge and it should be thrown out. The shooter is still liable under state homocide laws so it isn’t as if he’s going to walk free based on something Obama said.

  11. Held at a college, supporters bussed in, boos and hisses for Republican speakers, t-shirts for God’s sake… What y’all saw was the first stop of “Obama ’12”.

  12. It was kind of bizarre to see the crowd cheer every time the university president mention the name of the university.

    To Obama’s credit, he appeared very uncomfortable with all of the cheering.

    And as Carl quoted earlier, “And if, as has been discussed in recent days, their deaths help usher in more civility in our public discourse, let’s remember that it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy — it did not.”

    That really was well done because he said that while rhetoric wasn’t to blame people were still justified in going after Palin for her rhetoric. Even today, after Obama’s speech, it is not framed in the media or politicians as both sides needing to tone it down but as a problem related to just one party.

    If Obama would of come out and directly apologized to Palin as the leader of his party for the accusations she was to blame, then we would know he actually believed in what he was saying.

    Let’s see what happens over the coming days and weeks. I don’t want Republicans to stop their criticisms of Obama and I don’t expect the rhetoric directed at Palin to change.

  13. I’m underwhelmed, Leland. It even seems a bit of a cheap shot by Andy McCarthy. Fer Gawd’s sake, does anyone think there will be the slightest difficulty in convincing a jury of Arizonans to put this guy away forever, if not tie him to a tree and shoot him? C’mon. The President could jam his foot in his mouth down the knee, taint juries across 9/10 of the state, and still Loughner is going to die in prison for sure.

    I’m in no danger of going over to the Dark Side. I just think that on the (admittedly rare) occasion Obama does something right, he should get praise from his opponents, so that we teach our ideological cousins across the aisle (by example) that it is possible to be commanded by reason and judgment, and not yoke your higher cerebral functions to the most primitive tribal Us v. Them pissing-match instincts.

  14. seems a bit of a cheap shot by Andy McCarthy. Fer Gawd’s sake, does anyone think there will be the slightest difficulty in convincing a jury of Arizonans to put this guy away forever, if not tie him to a tree and shoot him?

    Indeed. That’s was my point about being convicted for the 9yr old. And as Larry mentions, so what if he isn’t held federally responsible for the death of a federal judge. He can still be held responsible by the state. Agreed… cheap shoot.

  15. I’m in no danger of going over to the Dark Side.

    …and here I was so looking forward to some good Pham-style light saber action. Then again, Rooster was a bit on the dark side as well. Let yer inner dark shine!

Comments are closed.