I heard someone say recently and smartly, “There are repercussions for telling the truth, but they are never worse than not telling the truth.” It is tough to watch on and see the lies pile up in the United States and across the world. The worst of the lies is that God is not in charge, that this world will end in some other way than with Jesus Christ, Who created everything, owns everything, and will rule over the earth.
Four indictments in four separate locations occurred against President Donald Trump. They all represent a world of lies and lying. Perhaps the title of this post could characterize the future for those indictments: prosecutorial misconduct, mistrial, and then dismissal of charges. A case could end on appeal in a higher court with a prosecutorial overturn. The treatment of these lower courts, the cumulative pressure, grinds down an elderly person.
I am not a lawyer, but prosecutors, as I understand it, are immune to criminal charges for prosecutorial misconduct. They can receive disciplinary actions, perhaps losing their jobs. Prosecutors won’t in these cases because where they work their bosses reward them for misconduct. They want misconduct as their work product. No one in their sphere of authority stops them. Many others encourage their wrongdoing.
Prosecuting Crimes, Not People
A prosecutor by nature is one in authority. He can’t prosecute without authority. A prosecutor prosecutes crimes, not people. He doesn’t see a person he’d like to punish, so he looks for a crime to prosecute. A prosecutor sees a crime and he investigates a crime. In the midst of that investigation of a crime, he finds a defendant, someone to accuse with proof of having committed a crime.
People in authority might live above or outside the laws applied to those under their authority. One could use highway patrol as an analogy. In order to catch speeders, they must speed. Prosecutors might think themselves justified for violating the very laws they prosecute. They contradict them even more than those they charge with a crime. They “must” to enforce the law. Highway patrol is not a good analogy for thinking they can use misconduct to prosecute. Law keepers best prosecutes law breaking.
Prosecution Everywhere
Prosecution occurs in almost any institution and even outside of institutional life. In response to prosecution comes defense. Prosecutors may misuse their positions and their authority to prosecute others. You know this happens. Maybe it happened or is happening to you. It has to me.
When someone brings a charge against someone, makes an accusation, this is prosecution. Someone judges another person guilty of some offense or crime. Sometimes they sentence the person to a kind of punishment, becoming both judge, jury, and executioner. In his classic, The Law, Frederic Bastiat wrote in 1850 after and over the French Revolution: “Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!” Under “the perversion of the law,” he wrote: “It has converted lawful defense into a crime, in order to punish lawful defense.”
Outside of a courtroom, often the prosecutor and the plaintiff are the very same person. It could be several ganging up against one person, agreeing on their charge. Intervention is necessary, a kind of righteous judge or mediator who can represent a defendant. Jesus Christ is the perfect depiction of this Person for an individual charged, a sympathetic high priest. He is an advocate. The prosecutors, it seems, are not advocates, like Jesus.
Purpose of Prosecution
Satan prosecuted his case against Job with an accusation. Job was a righteous man, but he wasn’t sinless. Job himself said that no one is just before God, implying justification by faith. However, Satan made a false accusation. Job really didn’t serve God because of the increased substance he enjoyed.
The Lord Jesus didn’t design the church for prosecution. No doubt churches need to judge, but like Jesus, they desire restoration. The idea of two or three witnesses is not a gang of inquisitors. In Matthew 18:15-18, Jesus says the point is to “gain the brother,” not “repulse the brother” or “destroy the brother.” The Apostle Paul writes in Galatians 6:1-3:
1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.
2 Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.
The goal in faults is the spiritual restoring in the spirit of meekness. Again, it isn’t prosecution. The ongoing, never ending purpose is restoration. After that it is bearing the burdens. The enemy of these two aims or objectives is a man or men thinking themselves to be something, deceiving themselves.
Prosecution in Real Life
Let’s say the prosecution says, this person did this. It comes with this charge or accusation. He didn’t do this. No evidence exists that he did. He denies it. The prosecution still charges ahead with its prosecution, a rush to judgment. When he denies, the prosecution goes one step further and charges with perjury. Now he is a liar because he said, “I didn’t do that.” He apparently perjures himself because he denied doing something he didn’t do.
At the same time a prosecutor looks for a crime. The pretext for the charge is not a crime, but a desire to prosecute. “The defendant tried to skirt the law.” But he didn’t and no evidence exists that he did.
As a pastor, I have experienced people reporting on others. When they did, I always took their testimony with a grain of salt. I listened, but I did not conclude. Every time I investigated first with the presumption of innocence. “Destroy not him . . . for whom Christ died” (Romans 14:15). Christ died to save, not to condemn. The goal in every situation is reconciliation and forgiveness.
I counseled at camps. Young people might violate camp rules. My job as counselor wasn’t to catch campers doing something wrong. I wanted to help campers, not kick them out of camp.
Prosecutorial misconduct occurs in more than criminal trials. They also occur in real life. Almost every institution includes forms of prosecution and defense.
Prosecutorial Misconduct
Merriam Webster online says that “prosecution” is “the process of pursuing formal charges against an offender to final judgment.” It is to bring an accusation or charges against someone. A judgment is made, such as guilty or not guilty, and then sentencing occurs.
The prosecutor leads a prosecution. He could represent a plaintiff, the latter one bringing the case against an accused. In ordinary life, outside of the courtroom, the prosecutor and the plaintiff are likely the same person. The prosecutor litigates the case, tries to prove the guilt of a defendant, even if he is also plaintiff.
Spolin and Dukes Law defines “Prosecutorial Misconduct”:
Essentially, prosecutorial misconduct is when the prosecutor commits misconduct, and what that means is when the prosecutor violates one of the rules about how there are certain rights defendants have. There are rules about what prosecutors are supposed to do and the rights that defendants have in a criminal case.
Prosecutorial misconduct should lead to a mistrial and then dismissal of charges. If you’re a prosecutor, the goal is not to win. It is justice and fair treatment. If you see those latter two did not occur, you yourself want mistrial and dismissal of charges.
Glad to know you have access to the evidence and know how to understand it so you can make these sweeping statements about the 4 indictments as you have done.
Oh yes, I forgot. You don’t know the evidence and you don’t know the law. You just regurgitate what political pundits spoonfeed you.
It is sad to see you go in this direction Kent. First, making ignorant statements about the indictments sort of invalidates everything you say after it, or at the least, it makes people less likely to take it seriously. There is no really compelling reason to take the rest of the article seriously after reading such nonsense at the start of it.
Second, my parents are similar to you. I grew up in a house without a TV. My parents were anti-TV. Today, they have found a new TV (YouTube) and show all the lack of discernment they used to accuse everyone else of. They actually buy into the same Trump-based conspiracy theories that you do. Truthfully, a lot of old people should have their internet access revoked so they can purge their minds.
You should think about that. My parents are 80, but you are too young to be so naive.
I don’t watch this on television or youtube. I read articles. I don’t listen to talk radio or watch Fox news or Newsmax. What I watch on youtube are the highlights of the Alcaraz-Djokovic tennis match or of the Nashville-InterMiami Leagues Cup soccer final. And yet, you the prosecutor “know” that’s what happened here. Why? Your 80 old parents, whom you publically disrespect, you believe get their positions from television pundits.
The idea, it seems, Frank, is that we must wait for a conviction of Trump to judge this. There was no conviction of Hilary Clinton, so that must mean she was not guilty. Comey said so. Trump colluded with Russia. Trump also apparently did quid-pro-quo with Zelensky. The Hunter Biden laptop is Russian disinformation, which needs censorship on social media. The expert Fauci said, no on masks, then yes on masks. The virus began in Wuhan China, but I repeat, it did not start in a lab in Wuhan China that creates viruses. Someone must start making assessments before these cases conclude, Frank. They don’t have to be a lawyer to do that. Non-lawyers must think on their own to discern the truth. I read what you wrote, I listened. I reject it.
Understanding that the indictments represent the best arguments of the prosecution, I can read. I can see what’s included in the law and what’s left out. I’m sorry you’re sad about this, Frank. Actually, I think the way I started this piece will result in more people continuing to read the rest of it.
Nothing brings out the nuts like somebody not saying mean things about Trump.
Tim,
I agree with your assessment that I was just not saying something mean about Trump. The absence of meanness, thinking that this was prosecutorial misconduct, triggers certain folks, who claim to be reasonable. The nutty side of the legal “theory” is this Lawrence Tribe 14th amendment one, that opts for disqualification. Crickets from Trump derangement on that. Zombie-like head nodding.
Yawn, typical response with more nonsense. You are far, far gone Kent.
So, your opening conspiracy theory nonsense is clickbait to get eyeballs? Glad you admitted it.
If you are still a pastor, I certainly hope you do not put the congregation through this kind of silliness. Maybe you should retire and become a political pundit yourself; you seem well-qualified.
No Frank, it wasn’t to get eyeballs, but to write a piece that would keep the interest of the readers. A writer should not do this at all costs, but it is an appropriate goal, to write in an interesting manner. Making parallels with current events brings a higher level of interest in a piece. Starting with “yawn” is just a cheap beginning to your comment. Obviously, this stirred you up or you would not have commented. Why not just interact instead of the personal attack, Frank?
In general, personal attacks will bring sympathy from readers toward what I’m writing. Maybe people disagree with my assessment of current events, but some might just give a counter to it, rather than attacking for the very writing of it, inviting cancellation.
Frank,
Or Grant,
I didn’t publish your comment. You’re going to have to do better than you did.