Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger
Okay, that's just blatant. And the vote to deny this guy his most basic rights was 8 to 1? What, is being a member of the Ku Klux Klan a requirement for serving on the Louisiana Supreme Court?
|
Before I forget it completely, there's a lulzy component to this story that's well worth pointing out.
The Louisiana Supreme Court didn't actually rule on the merits of anything here. The public defender representing the defendant in this criminal case filed a motion asking the trial judge to exclude incriminating statements the defendant made to the cops. The trial judge denied that motion, and the public defender appealed. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court, so the public defender sought review in the Louisiana Supreme Court.
As is true everywhere else, the Louisiana Supreme Court has discretion to decide which cases it hears and which it doesn't. When supreme court justices voted to deny review, they're not obliged to say why and almost never do; they just vote and that's that.
In this case, the vote against hearing the appeal was 6-1. [Turns out the earlier reports of an 8-1 vote were incorrect; the Louisiana Supreme Court only has 7 justices.] That would have been that, but for the fact that one justice decided to write a concurring opinion explaining his vote. From that lone concurring opinion we found out about the "lawyer dog" stuff.
In all likelihood, none of us ever would have heard of this story had that one Louisiana Supreme Court justice been able to resist the urge to strip naked, don a propeller beanie, and finger-paint "I am a neo-Confederate shitlord" on his chest in feces.
So thank you,
Justice Scott Crichton, dumbest of all dumb motherfuckers, for your complete lack of self-control.