View Single Post
Old February 4, 2020, 10:55 AM   #52
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 3,853
Originally Posted by USNRet
RFL are rife with problems but it 'worked' as it was designed, even if the design isn't great, Due Process-wise. The design includes a judge. In this case the judge did his job. It's akin to a judge sentencing a person to death, even if they disagree with the death penalty.
There is no indication from any of the coverage that this law worked as designed.

As designed, the petitioner should be before a judge within 24 hours, and before notice is given to the respondent. As designed, if the petitioner, presents testimony that supports the immediate order, that order should issue and the respondents arms taken. As designed, the respondent should be afforded a hearing with a couple of weeks.

None of that happened here.

There was no initial hearing for the first, exigent order; it isn't clear whether the clerk incorrectly acceded to a petitioner's request to dispense with that hearing. The sheriff refused to serve process, the respondent kept his arms, and the State's counsel defended the respondent while the magistrate tried to figure out the law by reading it from the bench.

One might conclude that all is well that ends well, but that isn't a conclusion about the design of this law.
zukiphile is offline  
Page generated in 0.02817 seconds with 8 queries