It probably
goes without saying that it is extraordinary for criminal charges
to be thrown out by a judge before any jury ever hears the evidence.
Juries decide guilt or innocence in this country. For the judge
to dismiss an indictment before trial, it means he concluded that
-- even if the jury finds everything Ronnie Earle alleges to be
true -- no crime was committed.
Obviously,
this was a huge victory for DeLay and, as The Washington Post
put it, "a slap at Texas prosecutor Ronnie Earle." (More
bad news for Ronnie Earle: Today President Bush said the embattled
Texas D.A. was doing "a heck of a job.")
Or, in the
words of CNN's Bill Schneider on what this means for Tom DeLay:
"Not good." In the expert analysis of Schneider, it
was "not good" for DeLay to have charges thrown out
because it would have been even better if all the charges had
been thrown out. It also would have been better if the judge had
dismissed the conspiracy charges and given DeLay an ice cream
cone.
But that
doesn't mean having criminal charges against you dismissed is,
I quote, "not good." And they think Fox News has twice
CNN's ratings just because it's fair and balanced. The accountants
at Fox could give a more penetrating legal analysis.
In the past
few years, all TV news has become less biased due to the salubrious
influence of Fox News. But Bill Schneider isn't backing off one
inch! Watching Schneider is like entering a time machine and seeing
how news was reported in the '80s. CNN ought to start broadcasting
Schneider's appearances only in black and white.
According
to Schneider, the judge's failure to dismiss the money laundering
charges proves "obviously, on at least one charge the judge
disagreed" with DeLay's claim that the prosecutor was politically
motivated. Schneider's entire understanding of criminal law was
apparently shaped during the Ally McBeal years.
Schneider
would have said more, but he had to run off to file a story about
how 4.3 percent growth, 215,000 new jobs, record productivity
gains and continued growth in real estate prices were "not
good" news for the economy.
In fact,
all we know as a result of the judge's ruling on Monday is that
the remaining charge against DeLay, if proved, would at least
constitute a crime.
To repeat
what you might already have heard in third grade: In America,
the validity of criminal charges is determined by the trier of
fact after a trial. A judge is not authorized to dismiss a criminal
indictment handed up by a grand jury just because the prosecutor
is a political hack.
This is true
even if the prosecutor had to spend three years and empanel six
grand juries to get an indictment.
It is true
even if the same prosecutor also indicted Republican Kay Bailey
Hutchison days after she was elected to the U.S. Senate, but after
spending a year holding press conferences in which he called Hutchinson
a criminal, still had no evidence and folded his hand.
It is true
even if the prosecutor is participating in a documentary about
a brave liberal prosecutor (Ronnie Earle) exposing a black-hearted
Republican (Tom DeLay) -- which wouldn't make much of a movie
if no charges were ever brought.
Thus, for
example, Earle's baseless charges against Hutchison -- like the
remaining charges against DeLay -- were not dismissed before trial.
What happened was, the trial date came and Earle had no evidence.
The judge ordered the jury to acquit.
Earle never
admitted he had no evidence against Hutchison. Instead, he made
a preposterous request of the judge. He asked the judge to issue
a pre-emptive ruling declaring all documents that Earle planned
to admit throughout the trial admissible -- without allowing the
judge to know what those documents were or allowing the defense
an opportunity to object. Obviously, the judge said he would have
to see the documents first and decide admissibility on a case-by-case
basis.
So now and
forevermore, Earle claims his case against Hutchison was watertight,
but because the judge ruled against him, he was prevented from
presenting his "evidence" to the jury. Remember that
when liberals call Bill O'Reilly a "liar" because he
won a Polk award, but one time he got confused and called it a
Peabody award.
