Sunday, October 9, 2016

WDT: A trial of errors: How Mary Rain, justice system failed Garrett Phillips’s family

      Maybe old Nicole Duve wasn't so bad....That's the implied conclusion in this Times editorial ripping DA Mary Rain who was enthusiastically endorsed by the paper just three years ago.....
      Calling the recent Oral Hillary case a "trial of errors," the paper concludes justice for Garrett Phillips is still elusive five hears after his death.
      Reasons for suspicion were evident before the 2013 election in which Ms. Rain cravenly made the dead child an issue, pledging to arrest and convict the killer, whom she likely had already decided was Oral Hillary.
     Concern should have been heightened with the election night swilling out of a champagne bottle, an act not consistent with the dignity of the office, but largely covered up.
      I always remember that in the context of a photographer in 2011 following me around the room on election night under orders (admitted to me later by the photographer)  to get a photo of me with a Miller Lite bottle to my lips.
      Endorsements are supposed to guide a less than informed public. In this case the public was let down.
Watertown Daily Times | A trial of errors: How Mary Rain, justice system failed Garrett Phillips’s family

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Only one real question left, will DA Rain remain in office until net year's election or will she be suspended by the Appellate Divsion and removed by the Governor for ethical violations?

Anonymous said...

Do you suppose Perrykos will ever tire of stating his foolish opinion about this case and DA Rain?

Perrykos admits they had a weak case. That means he admits they had a case! A prosecutor from Onondaga county with a stellar reputation agreed to prosecute the case, because it was a case. I am not sure when Perrykos obtained his law degree, but it sounds like he ranked last in his class.

No new evidence was ever going to come out. It was time to prosecute and see how unreasonable a jury would be in judging reasonable doubt. The jury/judge spoke and that is how our system works. Would Perry have us behave like Jefferson county's DA, where they never prosecute? Does he believe there should be a 100% conviction rate? I mean after all you should never take a case to court unless it is a guaranteed win, right?

The fact is that justice was served because the murderer, while not convicted, did have to suffer through a trial and contemplate the idea that he would be found guilty. That is the only punishment that the murderer will ever get and we have to be happy with that. Perrykos and Hillary should write a book and title it "If I did it".

Anonymous said...

11:27 There is a reason that there is no statute of limitations for homicide, and why police investigators never close a murder investigations because of the passage of time. Better to try and lose than not try at all argument doesn't work for murder prosecutions. Arrests and prosecutions in decades old "cold case" murders are not uncommon where new evidence develops. The STRmix process for DNA identification likely will be acceptable as evidence in court within the next year or two; there is a reasonable chance that nationwide AFIS (automated fingerprint identification system) will eventually produce a match to the patents found on the windowsill; and the murderer likely will eventually slip up and make an admission to the wrong person. Because of double jeopardy, ethical DA's do not promise prosecutions as part of campaigns, and do not bring charges prematurely. Rain has guaranteed that there will be no justice in this case. Either she went after an innocent man, or she exonerated a murderer.

Anonymous said...

If AFIS ever produced a match to those fingerprints, we would be in the same boat we were in with Hillary. You apologists for child murderers, would be explaining it away with reasoning like: "just because they went out the window doesn't mean they murdered the kid". REASONABLE DOUBT!!! REASONABLE DOUBT!!!


If STRmix becomes acceptable as evidence (the only reason it wasn't is because the judge said so), you apologists for child murderers would just explain it away with reasoning such as: "the guy was a boyfriend who frequent had contact with the child and would thus frequently come in contact with the child's DNA". REASONABLE DOUBT!!! REASONABLE DOUBT!!!

You editor types can hate on Mary Rain all you want and you get a pass because she gauchely took a swig from a champ-pag-nay bottle or whatever or spit her s-car-go out her nose. But the fact is that a widely acclaimed prosecutor with an impeccable reputation agreed to take on the case and prosecute it. He made that decision and put his reputation on the line, after knowing what evidence was there. And now perrykos is going to tell us he knows better. {shrug chuckle} Mmmm okayyyyyyyy.