Texas Judge Baird

A recent article in the Austin-American Statesman regarding District Judge Charlie Baird and his court rulings revealed Baird's thought process behind his sentences given to defandants. In the article written by Steven Kreytak, a staff member of the newspaper, the targeted audience is the general public. The local based newspaper is a reliable and trusted source of information, however it is cenorsored to an extent like most sources of news. The article remains unbiased for the majority of the statements, and poses the question whether Baird's sentences are too lax.


The argument is more between the defense lawyers and the prosecutors regarding Baird's decisions. "Baird says his rulings...are well thought out and based on the law." The local prosecutors are frustrated with some of Baird's sentences claiming the severity of the punishment isn't great enough, while the local defense lawyers feel Baird is just and reasoned in his punishments. There are obivously standards and values Baird upholds by being a Judge and he is lead in his decisions by laws and in turn the government.


The supportive evidence used in the article are previous court rulings made by Baird and qutoes from either Baird himself or defense lawyers. The evidence concludes that Baird is willing to give probation over jail time to defandants if they make good impressions and seem like they can become productive members of society. In a direct quote from Baird he states "Those who I think are salvageable...I work with any way that I can." Baird believes in probation because the Texas jail system isn't supportive of rehabilitation and in many instances Baird believes criminals leave the jail system in worse condition than when they entered. Other evidence supporting Baird favoring probation is how many probation cases he has on his docket, a total of 100, which is the most out of any other judge. Many defense lawyers and past defandants had positive comments regarding Baird's courtesy, fairness and compassion, while others have said that towards witnesses and prosecutors he is "curt."


With the evidence compiled the conclusion is subjective and depends on the beliefs of each individual. For me the conclusion is that Baird is not only just in his rulings but he is hopeful and even though some defandants take advantage of this I am glad it is available to others. I am glad that there is a judge who sees that locking someone up could cause more damage and is willing to negociate the punishment to the individual. I can also understand the frustration that prosecutors and family members might feel with the lax rulings, like maybe they were cheated or that the defandant deserved jail time. For me as a citizen my hope and want is for everyone to be a productive addition to society and I also believe in second and third chances like Baird. So I am convinced that Baird is a good District Court Judge making reasoned decisions.


Considering the political impact there is a direct link between Judge Baird's rulings and his re-election and whether he will continue to have loyalty from past supporters and gain new supporters with his rulings or if he'll lose support. Baird's rulings also have impact on the future of the defandants and future judges which effects society, which on a scale effects government. So read the article for yourself and see what critical thinking leads you to believe.
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/12/29/1229baird.html?cxntlid=inform

This Isn't Monoply Folks

There was interesting news in a recent article found on The Carpetbagger Report website regarding the Bush Administration. The article reveals that the Bush administration used the illegal torture method known as waterboarding on at least three prisoners they had detained. When the district attorney Mukasey was asked if there would be an investigation the answer was no due to the waterboarding was performed on the advice of a Justice Department legal. Also questioned was the illegal warrantless wiretapping program Bush had implemented, and again the defense was the same. Mukasey based the defense of not investigating because the Justice Department had given the o.k. and said it was lawful. The problem here is that torture is illegal and so is the unwarranted wiretapping and as to why the criminals are not being prosecuted is because in this case it is the President of the United States and the CIA that are the suspects. The administration is not being held responsible for its unlawful actions because the Justice Department has found a way to cheat the system that the writers of the constitution created. The executive branch is separate from the legislative branch; it is not the executive branch that interprets the law. Since when can a government official commit illegal acts and then in defense said well they(Justice Department) said it was o.k. and get away with it? Since when does ignorance to a law making breaking that law unprosecutable? The whole scandal sounds fishy, like the Bush administration is giving itself get out of jail free cards. I am paticularly astounded by the article, how can the law be twisted and corrupted in situations and then be justified because it is our government that is doing the law breaking? I was also shocked to see that the actual hearings took place in 2007 and just now I am finding out. I think the article is very beneficial to readers to show how corrupt the Bush administration is and how they aren't even covering up they are just getting out of jail for free because they are excersizing and abusing their power. I hope that whoever takes office after Bush will conduct a thorough investgation into the Bush administration and the legality of its policies. It is articles such as this one that motivates me to want to become more involved in the political arena and investigate all the injustices performed by our government. Are we as a society going to sit back and let the laws written and approved by Congress be reinterpreted and carried out unlawfully by the executive branch officials? http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14505.html#more-14505