Dancing in the moonlight
It's no Star Chamber. So what would it be called -- a Moon Chamber?
"It" is the Senate Ethics Committee, which could be convened to consider the involvement of Senate Majority Leader Curt Bramble in the strange case of a rogue elephant parade float.
In short, the float was constructed with the illegal use of public monies by a state technology college for the Utah County Republican Party. The funds were later reimbursed by a donation, but not until the college president allegedly falsified documents to try to cover up the incident.
Two legislators involved in initiating the float construction project were Bramble, who says his role was small, and Rep. Becky Lockhart, who so far has decided she has no interest in talking to The Tribune.
Ric Cantrell, chief deputy of the Senate, told us some in the Senate are seriously considering launching an ethics investigation to "clear the good senator's name."
"It's obvious to almost everyone that Senator Bramble just asked an innocent question," Cantrell continued. "But we're thinking of clearing the air, clearing his good name and protecting the Senate as an institution."
In other words, the verdict is in before the trial begins, or even before the jury is called. (That's probably a lot easier to do when the jury is composed of senators rather than strangers who -- in a real trial -- would be disqualified for being friends and colleagues with the defendant.)
This is pretty much the opposite of the so-called Star Chamber, which Webster tells us was a royal English tribunal -- abolished in the late 1600s -- notorious for administering "harsh and arbitrary" judgments, often after confessions were coerced by torture. In that case the outcome was predetermined, too, only it was "guilty."
So the Senate Ethics investigation being contemplated, with its predetermined finding of "innocent" -- would it properly be called a Moon Chamber?
-- Dan Harrie
"It" is the Senate Ethics Committee, which could be convened to consider the involvement of Senate Majority Leader Curt Bramble in the strange case of a rogue elephant parade float.
In short, the float was constructed with the illegal use of public monies by a state technology college for the Utah County Republican Party. The funds were later reimbursed by a donation, but not until the college president allegedly falsified documents to try to cover up the incident.
Two legislators involved in initiating the float construction project were Bramble, who says his role was small, and Rep. Becky Lockhart, who so far has decided she has no interest in talking to The Tribune.
Ric Cantrell, chief deputy of the Senate, told us some in the Senate are seriously considering launching an ethics investigation to "clear the good senator's name."
"It's obvious to almost everyone that Senator Bramble just asked an innocent question," Cantrell continued. "But we're thinking of clearing the air, clearing his good name and protecting the Senate as an institution."
In other words, the verdict is in before the trial begins, or even before the jury is called. (That's probably a lot easier to do when the jury is composed of senators rather than strangers who -- in a real trial -- would be disqualified for being friends and colleagues with the defendant.)
This is pretty much the opposite of the so-called Star Chamber, which Webster tells us was a royal English tribunal -- abolished in the late 1600s -- notorious for administering "harsh and arbitrary" judgments, often after confessions were coerced by torture. In that case the outcome was predetermined, too, only it was "guilty."
So the Senate Ethics investigation being contemplated, with its predetermined finding of "innocent" -- would it properly be called a Moon Chamber?
-- Dan Harrie
1:18 PM
| 
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home