PUBLISHER'S NOTE: (EDITORIAL): As a result of the Louisiana Supreme Court decision vacating his first-degree murder conviction and the death sentence and ordering a new trial, Rodricus Crawford is back where he started: Presumed innocent, but utterly in the hand's of the state's prosecutors as they decide whether to proceed with a new trial and, of immediate importance, on what bail terms he should be released until that decision is made - up to a year from now. The attitude the prosecutors take towards bail will reflect if, in this moment of truth, they are motivated by a sense of justice, or acting out of vengeance. If motivated by justice, they will agree to Crawford's release on his own signature - especially given the message implicit in the Supreme court justice's rulings, that prosecutors have failed to attain the standard of proof required to convict him of the offences with which he was charged. If motivated by justice, they will agree to release on his signature while they consider their future steps, because it would be cruel to make him a prisoner outside of death row by imposing terms restricting his movements. If motivated by justice, they would announce their intention to make a decision as quickly as possible so that 28-year-old Crawford can get on with his life. If motivated by vengeance, they will go for a high cash bail, in the hope that he will be unable to raise it and will have to remain behind bars. A win for the prosecution. If motivated by vengeance, they will seek a raft of terms restricting his movement and liberty - in the hope that, burdened by the difficulty of adjusting to life outside of death row, he will somehow breach those terms and can be sent back to jail, where they wanted him in the first place. If motivated by vengeance, they will plough forward with a new trial in the hope that sometime in the future, by stacking the jury, invoking Christ again, or whipping up the jurors to convict. Another great victory for the state. A worthy punishment for a man who is guilty in their eyes of the offence of 'robbery' - guilty of robbing the state of the opportunity to house him in a brutal institution, guilty of robbing the state of the opportunity to torture him with the thoughts of an always looming brutal death, and guilty of robbing the state of its well-earned, gol-darn deserved precious right to take Rodricus's life away. And all that is even better if he is innocent- and that no crime has occurred - as some of the justice's on the Louisiana Supreme Court have concluded. So, will it be justice or vengeance? As Rodricus Crawford's hearing is being held early next week we should be confronted with the moment of truth very shortly. May 'justice' prevail.
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/c
