Rutland Herald
May 05,2016
There are two ways a citizen can be charged with a crime in Vermont. One is where a law enforcement officer believes probable cause exists that a crime has been committed and issues a citation.
The other is by grand jury indictment. The grand jury is a panel of citizens who decide whether probable cause exists.
Grand juries are often used by prosecutors when presented with information a crime has been committed, but circumstances are such that the prosecutor wants confirmation from a jury of citizens that the charge should be brought.
This is where Rose Kennedy found herself when a person was killed after colliding with an animal in the road. While many may disagree with the indictment, it was the grand jury’s decision that probable cause did exist that a crime may have been committed.
Honoring a grand jury indictment is made that much more difficult when the person charged is an outstanding member of the community.
However, these are the tough calls a prosecutor has to deal with. Their oath of office requires them to pursue the grand jury indictment, even though it may be unpopular. Time will tell whether another jury will agree.
Either way, Rose Kennedy is doing a hard part of the job she was elected to do.
JOHN PAUL FAIGNANT
Rutland Town
Comment: If there is a test here it is of Ms. Kennedy's judgement. As one elected to use her judgement as to what incidents to bring forth before a grand jury Ms. Kennedy has miserably failed. In this case there are civil remedies available. It's not as if Craig Mosher willfully flouted the law with no regard.
As the saying goes, a prosecutor "can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich". Only one side of the case is presented, no defense is presented or allowed - the prosecutor is in full control. The grand jury is just a buffer so it doesn't look like the prosecutor is the one dictating the indictment.
As was stated in the above letter "the person charged is an outstanding member of the community" and what better way to gain notoriety than persecuting a prominent member of the community under the guise of "passing a test" or "making a tough decision".
More and more this seems like political grandstanding in the quest for higher office. I certainly hope it that isn't the case, but making a judgement to prosecute a high profile personage, which Craig Mosher certainly is with all he has done for the central Vermont community, to gain political notoriety does not pass any tests of judgement. It just shows blind ambition.
In my opinion Ms. Kennedy shows a distinct lack of judgement in this case. There is no need to go after a criminal indictment especially when civil remedies are available (and have already been settled).
Craig Mosher has already paid a penalty, through the loss of his pet, the financial settlement reached with the Bellis family, and the emotional travail he has endured in the wake of this tragedy.
Now he is faced with more persecution, legal bills, disruption of his business, and the looming threat of incarceration.
Do we really need this prosecution, which is sending out tremors of panic amongst farmers, livestock owners, and even pet owners, not just in Vermont but nationwide, who fear if something happens involving their animals they can be prosecuted? Do we really need some flatlander from Pittsburgh coming into our community with the attitude "We're going to teach him [Mosher} a lesson."
That kind of attitude is not reflective of a person with sound judgement. My grade is an F.
Vito
No comments:
Post a Comment