Should the Lawyer Have Gotten the Boot?
I tried to post once this morning, but after working on it for awhile, Blogger lost the connection and everything vanished. Fun times...
So instead I'm going to do a short version. In Santa Barbara, the Appeals Court removed a prosecutor from a rape case because she had written a novel (self-published) that had a similar rape.
Here's the link http://www.metnews.com/articles/2006/hara100606.htm
I think this is a case of the judges having a hard time sorting out fact and fiction. What do you all think?
posted by Jennifer at 10:55 AM
5 Comments:
If Judges have a problem with separating fact and fiction it's just no wonder that ordinary people have so much trouble. I always thought that was...well...their job.
I'm constantly telling other readers to remember it's only fiction...only fiction.
I loved this line...
"Dudley is using her official position to obtain personal financial gain."
Well duh! Isn't that what a paying job is all about. I know that isn't what the ruling meant, but that is what it said.
There were several points I found interesting.
1) That Dudley would write under her own name
2) She had to pay to have the books published
3) That being able to write fiction would cloud her judgement in trying a real live case.
She's a prosecuting attorney, isn't it her job to try the guy?
4) That Sanger (whose got a large reputation) would argue that her book and she herself would taint the ability of the entire D.A.'s office.
Lawyering leads to politicians and judges. I hope not too many wonder why our system is screwed up.
Marie, it's just weird. Writing fiction is worlds away from prosecuting a rape case.
Cele, good points. I'm wondering when we started investigating and judging the prosecutor instead of the defendant?
So basically, if you write fiction you can no longer do you job as a prosecuting attorney. Good to know.
Ktzmom, crazy, isn't it?
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home