[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by s.p.hansen

And I said that you must have no sympathy for us in Utah if you don't think it is unreasonable for a Higher Court to consider a claim that no one in Utah can be deemed a fair juror. Please address that for me.

[...]

Really, and that is why we need to go to another state for this. So Let me get this straight. They selected a cross section of the metro area for 220 jurors and made them go through tons of screening and the Federal Judge in Utah oversaw the process.

The complaint is that in Utah a fair jury could not be found because of the media saturation and locality. Also, it implies that the judge did not do his job right in Utah in adequately overseeing the selection of the jury.

This is what the petition was about, yes - did the judge do his job? That's what appellate courts do - they ensure the district courts do their jobs. If you dump the emotion, there is existing law and procedure on this. If the judge follows it, there is minimal cause for concern and little delay. Nobody is saying the people of Utah are incapable of serving on a jury, so long as the process can identify jurors who are not compromised (again, a legal concept, well defined by existing law).

Originally Posted by s.p.hansen

So states with a lot of media coverage concerning a local matter are compromised in their ability to be fair? Do you not see how this sets a bad precedent?

It doesn't set a bad precedent at all. This isn't a new problem - Utah is not the lucky venue to host the federal courts' first-ever high profile case. And there is already ample case law on the subject. This is important - the District Court doesn't set precedent, it follows precedent. All the more reason to defer to the Circuit Court now, rather than later.

Originally Posted by s.p.hansen

There are some traditions of respect once a trial gets started that shouldn't be undercut to slow down the appeal process. If you really wanted to take that idea and apply it to other cases it would change the whole system. That is why I say it starts a bad precedent in the system.

Really, What traditions are those? I don't remember anything the Federal Rules of Civil/Criminal Procedure about a tradition of non-interruption. Nothing that happened here changed the system. You should become more familiar with the system, then we can have this discussion. I'll check, in the meantime, do some research.

Originally Posted by s.p.hansen

which by the way was shot down today and the trial will resume in Utah on Monday.
[...]
There is a difference between looking and investigating. They have to look at every claim, but the don't have to say it is legitimate and requires investigation.

Excellent, so the system worked!

Originally Posted by s.p.hansen

To assume that there are rational people living in Utah who love and live by the constitution. And that we have legitimate judges.

Again, you misunderstand the role of the federal judiciary. That district judge is no more Utah's than the 10th circuit judges are Colorado's or the Supreme Court is Washington's. In fact, the entire appeal of the federal courts is the ability, when confronted by a passionate and potentially biased local populace, to appeal to an impartial court sitting farther away. So I suppose, by its nature, the federal court system is raising its nose at local folks everywhere, not just Utah. But that's exactly why the founders created it; there is no home team advantage in a federal courtroom.

(I also assume it's federal law, not Utah state law, this defendant is being prosecuted under. If that's true, the constitution doesn't care if its jurors and judge come from Utah, Mississippi, or Maine. So again, your passions are misplaced.)

Your comments about federal judges being essentially untouchable isn't really accurate, either. You always have three options:

1. if a law is being broken, a federal judge can always be impeached.
2. if the law is being applied, but you don't agree with it, you have to turn to the political process; that's not really a criticism of the judiciary. (I suspect your issues with the "Legacy Highway debacle" fall here).
3. if the law is not be applied, or is being applied improperly, you can always appeal.

There are really only 9 people in the entire country who are above reproach. And none of them sit in Denver.

As for my inability to read, comprehend, etc. etc.... let's continue this discussion after you pass the Utah bar.

edit: thank you for reminding me why I never want to teach procedure. eww.