Thursday, February 19, 2009

Judge Sharon “Killer” Keller To Go On Trial

Remember the case of the presiding judge of the Texas Court of Appeals who refused to allow a condemned prisoner to file an after hours appeal on the evening before he was ultimately put to death?

I believe the words that sealed the ultimate fate of this man, accused of rape and murder, were “We close at 5.”

And so convicted rapist and murderer, Michael Richard, was put to death by lethal injection. It was the manner of death that was on issue, not the guilt or innocence of Richard.

Well while Republicans up and down the state “praised the judge for treating Richard like the killer he was” someone filed a complaint. Actually a whole bunch of death penalty activists did.

And so now “Killer” Keller will face the state’s judicial ethics commission in a public trial that could result in her removal from the bench, a reprimand, a slap on the wrist, or complete exoneration.

In my humble opinion, someone who is condemned to death – that is the public ending of his days - deserves to be heard and does not deserve the peckish and decidedly icy response “we close at 5.” It reflects on the entire state, and deservedly so, as it was the voters that put this cold-hearted woman on the bench.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Don't count on too much from the TCJC. They operate a great deal like other state agencies in the industry protection racket. We reported a local judge for his involvement and non recusal in a local development company case that was expanded to the chief county judge and a supervising judge who heard an appeal while accepting legal bribes from company executives involved in the case. After a 6-8 month investigation that they expanded. They ruled that it was a civil matter and could be handled through more expensive civil litigation to the targets/victims. The crux of the investigation centered on the contributions from the company, lack of recusal and a family member (daughter) of the chief judge involved with a local vendor law-firm doing business with that same company (which is a very interesting political crony-story in and of itself).

We must protect the industry, I believe, was the slogan at the time.