Some Justice

by Jimmy Akin

in Current Affairs

There’s an episode of I, Claudius titled "Some Justice," in which a trial is held in the Senate to bring to justice those responsible for the death of Claudius’s brother, Germanicus.

The machinations of Roman politics being what they are . . . er, were . . . in the end only "some justice" is done.

That episode came to mind as I read



Mr. Freedman said Mr. Nifong, 56, a prosecutor for nearly 29 years, would have never risked his law license and career on hiding DNA evidence that he knew the defense would find.

F. Lane Williamson, chairman of the ethics panel, responded that “there is no rational explanation sometimes” for unethical or illegal behavior. “I don’t know if we’ll ever know,” he said.

Actually, Thomas Sowell doesn’t think that Nifong’s actions were at all inexplicable. He thinks there is a perfectly clear and logical, if evil, reason for them.



If you liked this post, you should join Jimmy's Secret Information Club to get more great info!

What is the Secret Information Club?I value your email privacy


BillyHW June 20, 2007 at 2:17 am

Be sure to check out the date on the prophet Sowell’s columns.

Barbara June 20, 2007 at 5:34 am

But none of this is new. FOX News reported all of this last year.

Jamie Beu June 20, 2007 at 6:12 am

You can’t trust Fox News… don’t you know better than that? Angelina Jolie said so. And if Democrat politicians won’t debate there, there must be something wrong.
/ sarcasm
So, how does one get rid of electing D.A.s and judges without destroying democracy itself? Hmm….. Maybe having them appointed by the governor with the approval of the state congress?

Brian Day June 20, 2007 at 8:08 am

For elected judges and district attorneys, there is always the recall. No need to scrap elections at the local level.

Jonathan Prejean June 20, 2007 at 11:53 am

He thinks there is a perfectly clear and logical, if evil, reason for them.
This raises for me the pesky problem of how evil counts as a “reason” for anything. In the metaphysical sense, evil is irrational by definition. I just wonder what the right term is here. Would it be better to see that the evil motive is the accidental explanation for the events? Is this statement just saying that the person himself was a deficient cause?
In some sense, I think Lane Williamson must surely be right that there is no rational explanation, and it is even true that there can be no rational explanation for evil. So what should we properly call the sort of calculated malice at work here?
If you’ve got any thoughts, Jimmy, I’d love to hear them.

BobCatholic June 20, 2007 at 1:52 pm

This is logical only if you see him as worshipping at the altar of LeftWingWackoism.
*bow* ….must blame rich white males as they are all evil….*bow*….must cast black woman as a victim as they’re all victims….*bow*….must show the same old sterotypical racist blather….*bow*….must play race card….*bow*…..
Now, if he were not a left winger, trying to pander to left wingers….this would never have happened.

nutcrazical June 20, 2007 at 3:21 pm

I’m confused. I remember hearing about this case – they said there was no DNA from the Duke lacrosse players in the woman’s body. This was a long time ago. Now I read that the attorney was hiding DNA evidence… to push the case against the players. It would make sense if he was their defense attorney and was hiding the evidence to protect them, because the evidence that was presented, according to what I heard, exculpated the accused. So the only way the evidence the attorney did not present could change the case around was if it proved the accused’s guilt.
Having read Barbara’s comment, though, it makes more sense now. A little bit.

Mary June 20, 2007 at 5:07 pm

Barbara, the first link is new. If of the “mills of God” variety.
Alas, many people’s statements fall under the statute of limitations at this point.
(I’ve been following this case for some time.)

Jarnor23 June 23, 2007 at 8:43 pm

I’m afraid I have a hard time pulling a ton of sympathy for the Lacrosse folks here. They may not have raped her, but they hired her to strip for them. Perfectly legal, yes. Also perfectly disgusting and immoral. But now they’ll be treated like innocent little lambs since they didn’t actually RAPE her. Glad our standards are so high.

Anonymous July 6, 2007 at 3:08 pm

Most college students unfortunately engage in that behavior. Does that mean that Mike Nifong was right? no. Of course sexual sins are wrong. unfortunately, stippers aren’t criminal. Fortunately, rape is.

David B. July 6, 2007 at 3:21 pm

opps. Posted by: | Jul 6, 2007 3:08:23 PM
was Moi.

Previous post:

Next post: