Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

Fox - Folbaum Asks If Judges Will Be Sympathetic To Defense Lawyers Who Try To Use The Law To Assist Clients

Reported by Donna - December 28, 2005

On Monday I reported that Rick Folbaum, who is filling in for Shepard Smith this week on Studio B, actually asked a very naive, very partisan question in my post, Fox - Rick Folbaum - Wouldn't Most Americans Agree With The President Eavesdropping? Folbaum seemed to think that most Americans would agree with the president breaking the law and spying on Americans if it was for their own protection.

Today Folbaum continued his naive, partisan tones during a discussion with Daveed Gartenstein-Ross (a senior terrorism analyst at the Investigative Project, a terrorism research center).

Folbaum and Gartenstein-Ross were discussing the fact that terror suspects may use the new information that the NSA may have used illegal wiretaps in order to prove their cases, to use in an appeal or in regards to not allowing testimony in ongoing trials.

Folbaum's question? He asked if whether judges would be sympathetic to what defense lawyers put out there in the defense of these convicted terrorists, or alleged terrorists.

Gartenstein-Ross told him it wasn't a matter of sympathy, it was a matter of law. He told Folbaum that the judges would be 'constrained by law.'


Comment: Folbaum tried to frame the segment around feelings and.he was saying that these were terrorists, or alleged terrorists, so the judges shouldn't be sypathetic to anything the defense lawyers may ask the judge in regards to their trials. What Folbaum didn't understand was that this has nothing to do with feelings, nothing to do with sympathy to lawyers of convicted terrorists or alleged terrorists. This was a matter of law and that is the the only thing that the judge would be bound by.

If someone is writing these questions for Folbaum, he should get a new writer. And if he is asking thse questions himself? He should get a new writer. What is it about 'constrained by law' that Fox doesn't understand? At the end of the day the law must be upheld no matter where your sympathies lie. If something is done illegally, that will be addressed.

Comments
Post a comment




Remember Me?


We welcome your opinions and viewpoints. Comments must remain civil, on-topic and must not violate any copyright or other laws. We reserve the right to delete any comments we deem inappropriate or non-constructive to the discussion for any reason, and to block any commenter for repeated violations.

Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.