Posted by
NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Monday, October 09, 2006 8:30:12 PM
This is part of the
I Don't Rant-I Write series. Sometimes I am not quite as clear as I want to be. Take my
Law That is Never Disobeyed post. I talked around the subject of whether the legal profession's abhoration of simultaneous criminal prosecution with civil litigation is good or bad public policy.
It can be both. No "innocent" party wants to defend both litigation and criminal prosecution. On the other hand, A refusal to allow the prosecution of an active criminal who happens to be involved in a lawsuit encourages that criminal to delay the civil litigation until the statute of limitations expires. Criminal law is supposed to be a deterrent to criminal activity, but if no crime against a litigant can ever be prosecuted while a civil suit is in progress, the litigant's only recourse is to endure the criminal activity or abandon the lawsuit. Neither outcome is desirable.
In the case of DA Carol Chambers who is alleged to have threatened attorney Jonathan R. Steiner, I have to apply what I believe are community standards. Even if what Chambers did was technically a crime (and I'm not sure it was), a prosecutor would have to empanel a VERY SPECIAL jury, probably all lawyers, to expect a conviction.
Hey, isn't that exactly what is happening?
-------
I want to state again that I have no special knowledge other than what I
read in the Rocky Mountain News.