The Campaign For DA

9.20.2016

Random Public Trial Thoughts As Closing Arguments Begin In Arochi Trial


There are lots of things which have "always been done" which are wrong. This ruling in essence closes a public courtroom and the appellate courts don't like closing courtrooms. (The video feed makes it possibly constitutional if a room has been designated to watch it.)

I've got trouble with this. Think about it.  The judge, who has no say on guilt or innocence, is supposed to be impartial in this trial. He can't even comment on how he feels about the evidence or which side he thinks should "win".  So why does the victim's family get preferential treatment by the judge? This is the The State of Texas vs. Arochi not Arochi's Alleged Victim and Family vs. Arochi.  Does the judge's treatment of the victim's family and law enforcement send an implicit message that he is sympathetic to their position when that position is that Arochi is guilty? Why isn't this tax payer funded public forum subject to the "first come first serve" rule?  Those who are now denied entry to the courtroom because of lack of space have just as much of a right to see the public trial as those who were witnesses or have a vested interest in the result.


8 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm OK with each family (accused and victim) getting spaces saved. Not the investigating cops, however.

Sam Brows said...

Best guess as to the answer to this question: the Defense attorney, sweating the details of his closing argument, was too focused on what he was planning on saying to realize what he should be saying, and thus never made the argument that the judge's making sure the victim's family got a seat sent a tacit message. I think if the argument HAD been made it would be pretty darned difficult to ignore, especially given that the only people there to argue on behalf of the family would be the state since those folks aren't going to have counsel standing by at the ready to go argue for them.

Anonymous said...

So why does the victim's family get preferential treatment by the judge? This is the The State of Texas vs. Arochi not Arochi's Alleged Victim and Family vs. Arochi.

Yeah, that dead girl is just history. Nobody can bring her back. This should be Arochi's show. It's all about whether this guy is going to be deprived of his liberty to party and sell dope and possibly kill other women. What kind of weird sociopath judge tries to make justice for a murder victim the focus of a trial anyway?

Andy Stevenson said...

Does it really matter? Her DNA was in the trunk of his car.

Anonymous said...

Wow. Victim hating. A new low.

Anonymous said...

OK fine. Here's the deal. Need you to write a $10,000 check, right now, for YOUR share as a taxpayer to make sure the every courtroom in America has the ability, on the rarest of trials, to handle a huge crowd of people who are completely unrelated to the case but just want to be there for entertainment. What? You aren't willing to pay your $10,000 for that? Then deal with the fact that the affected people get seated inside when there's a huge crowd.

Anonymous said...

False compassion which is gradually growing in this country is a pity that is shown not to the mugged, but to the mugger…There are some judges, some social workers (not all), there are sob sisters, the social slobberers who insist on compassion being shown to the mugger, dope fiend, beatnicks, prostitutes, homosexuals, punks…For that today, the decent man is practically off the reservation. This is a false compassion.”

Anonymous said...

If you think judges are impartial and don't manipulate the court to favor police and prosecutors you're more naive than I thought.