Discussion:

Discussion for article #241231

Oh, well if he is going to resign, that makes everything ok.

6 Likes
2 Likes
  His attorney didn't specify to The Tulsa World when exactly the sheriff would step down

I’m sure he needs some time to ?check? on a few things —

1 Like

Glanz? Ha…I must be tired if that’s giving me giggles…long week…

3 Likes

Paper shredders in overdrive

4 Likes

Wait! This accountability happened in (gasp!) Oklahoma?!

I know. First the state Supreme Court orders the removal of the 10 Commandments, now this.

a state grand jury handed down two misdemeanor criminal indictments against him

For future reference, Grand Jury indictments are traditionally “handed up” (to the court). Decisions are “handed down” (by the court). Admittedly, not many people know the difference, and reporters write for their readers, not for judges, but if you are going to use the terminology you might as well use it correctly. Otherwise, you should have followed the lead of the Tulsa World article that you cited and said “returned the indictments”, which is the easy way out.

From Webster’s New World Law Dictionary:

hand down v. For a judge or court to release a decision upon a motion or at the resolution of a trial or appeal.

hand up v. For a grand jury to process an indictment of an accused.

6 Likes

Very cool…

after a state grand jury handed down two misdemeanor criminal indictments

I don’t ask that civilians know this, but if the author will be reporting on other news involving the law, she should learn it: juries don’t hand things down. Ever. Not petit juries, not grand juries.

Why is that? Because what they hand over, they hand to the judge, up on the bench. Verdict? Handed up to the judge on the bench. Indictment? Handed up to the judge presiding on the bench.

Corollary: That’s also why we say judges hand things down, see? They’re up on the bench, so they hand down to the rest of us, who are not thus elevated.

This is not a difficult concept if you think about it a teeny bit.

1 Like

I know it’s crazy but in another case in OK a mother received two 15 year sentences for failing to protect her two children from child abuse. The abuser is the children’s father and admitted to breaking one of his daughter’s legs. The father received a two year sentence. Oh and he didn’t just abuse his children he abused her as well. OK has a long way to go in the justice department.

1 Like

OK is not O.K.

In 2006, Hall pleaded guilty to permitting the abuse of her two young children. She received two 15-year sentences, to run one after another.

WhoTF was her lawyer?

Is there more to this story, because my efffing god, this is…

“there was no special treatment.”

That’s the sad part about it - neither Bates nor Eric Harris got treated differently from anyone else who looked like them.

It’s called “keeping the pension”. I do wonder how many workers’ compensation claims he will make going out the door.

Now it’s time to focus on the murderer, Robert Bates. This guy is in bad need of finding out the meaning of, Living on Tulsa Time.

To joelopines: It’s not a difficult concept. But it IS a rather irrelevant one. A distinction without a difference?

I would REALLY like to see these municipalities and counties refuse to accept resignations in this manner. They should have rejected his resignation and begun actual termination proceedings. These forced resignations are the reason bad cops are able to hop from place to place, because once the officer resigns, disciplinary proceedings are halted and no findings are available to use to keep the bad officer from finding another set of victims. We call it the “muni shuffle” in St Louis

It should not be irrelevant to a professional explainer. That’s just lame.

The concept of distinction without a difference applies to advocacy. In pedagogy, the audience can choose what importance to give distinctions, but the pedagogue should get them right so the choice can be made knowingly. If a reporter doesn’t teach, he should just shut up.