XPost: talk.politics.drugs, talk.politics.guns, alt.current-events.usa   
   XPost: talk.politics.misc, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.usa.republican   
   XPost: alt.politics.bush, alt.law-enforcement   
   From: drp@drproctor.com   
      
   On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 22:26:28 GMT, David Lentz   
    wrote:   
      
   >  The Constitution does not demand perfect process of   
   >law only due process of law.   
      
            Interesting point.  Recently,   here in Texas,   compelling   
   evidence came up of a person's innocence _after_ they had run thru all   
   their statutory appeals.      This limitation came about because   
   people were offended by extended appeals..   The person had had "due   
   process by any existing legal definition.   
      
              The court of criminal appeals ( all elected for being   
   "tough on crime")   was faced with following the law and sending a   
   pretty-obviously innocent party to prison because of this "legal   
   technicality".       So they ruled that imprisoning an innocent party   
   is itself a violation of due process,  tho there was no precident for   
   this in case law.   
      
   Dr P   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)