Well, ladies and gentlemen, thanks for your patience. It's time.

What the freakin' heck were the citizens of this state thinking when they approved a constitutional amendment so that criminal defendants no longer have the right to confront their accuser(s) face to face? The amendment changed Section 9 of Article I, the Declaration of Rights of the constitution by eliminating the language that assures that those accused of a crime have the right to meet their accuser face to face. I believe that the voters of this Commonwealth were mislead into thinking this would only apply in cases where children are involved, but that will not be case. Perhaps that was the intent, but it won't happen that way. Even if it did happen that way, it would still be a bad idea. Here's why:

Personal confrontation is powerful. Jesus taught us this in Matthew 18. "If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.'" Jesus taught that those being accused (even the guilty ones!) have the right to be confronted by their accuser. Why should we change that?

There is also the issue of prosecutorial misconduct in the criminal justice system. We have stacked the deck with prosecutors that are only interested in conviction rates, not the truth. That's because we live in a "Get Tough on Crime" society that rewards politicians and prosecutors who are brutal to people, even innocent people. Putting these men and women in front of real people, real juries, real defense attorneys, live and in person, brings a pressure and intensity that would be greatly diminished when hiding behind a television screen. I work in television, and so I understand how difficult it is for people to "be real" when dealing with any type of media. A person in front of a camera is going to be a different person than one in front of 12 living, breathing, watching human beings.

We go on and on all we want about "protecting the children," but truth is what we’re after with the justice system. Truth should not be sacrificed on the altar of our version of "compassion."

Jamie- are you insulting my post?! Just because I choose not to provide discertations on deep issues doesn't make what I have to say any less post-worthy. I'm a person, too. I have value. Really, I do. :)

Taj,

I would not call it an affliction to realize that most topics are not adequatly discuessd in 3 sentences. Perhaps discussions on bunnies, trips to Michigan, and inhaling chipmunks can be adequetly addressed in your proverbial "short post". However, there are some discussions that require a bit more thought and time to adequetly provide ones opinion.

I would rather wait for a long time for a post from John which, although very probably incorrect, will be thoughtful, articulate, intelligent and witty.

"...let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak..." - James 1