A Contemptible Pardon
This article doesn’t have much to do with communication. Or maybe it has everything to do with communication. In any event, allow me me one last rant as a practicing lawyer.
Last Friday, while most Americans were focused on Hurricane Harvey, the Donald quietly pardoned Sheriff Joe Arpaio– his only presidential pardon to that point.
Now, to be sure, mercy is divine. All of us did stupid things in our youth. Some got caught, some didn’t. Writing off juvenile stupidity and giving a second chance is generally a good thing.
Even older citizens get cross-threaded sometimes, do something stupid, end up in criminal court, and pay the price. They then go on to fly straight and prove they’ve learned their lesson. They, too, deserve a fresh start. When pardons recognize contrition and reform, they are a good thing and indicate a civilized society.
But there will be cases where a pardon is wrong– no, actually, where it is a calculated evil. These would include cases where the accused has pissed contemptuously all over the law and continues to express his scorn for civilized values.
Joe Arapaio was no teenager when he committed his crime, and make no mistake, a crime it was– otherwise, why pardon it? Sheriff Joe was a senior citizen and a military veteran at the time he committed his crimes, and he should have known better. He was the Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, an area with a population of several million. As chief law enforcement officer, he had sworn that he would uphold the law.
But Sheriff Joe didn’t uphold the law. He broke it. Actually, he flaunted it. He thought he knew better than all the judges and all the legislators, so he made up his own law as he went along.
He thought he was Dirty Harry, which is fine in the movies, but not when you are the head of law enforcement in a major municipality. Or any place, for that matter.
Exactly what was Sheriff Joe doing? Speeding? Fishing out of season? Building a rec room without a permit? No, he was setting up concentration camps, running chain gangs, and conducting unlawful arrest and detention, among other things. So the courts told him to cut it out. Not only local courts, but Federal courts as well.
His response? He told them to mind their own business. He told the courts that he would honour his oath to uphold the law, but it was up to him to decide what the law of Maricopa County was, and he would enforce it as he saw fit.
The courts’ response? They found him in contempt. Not merely civil contempt, but criminal contempt, which is significantly more serious. It’s also harder to prove.
To be found guilty of criminal contempt, the court must find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the accused has displayed a continuing wilful refusal to obey a court order, which conduct tends to publicly depreciate the authority of the court and the administration of justice.
In simple terms, the courts had found beyond a reasonable doubt that Sheriff Joe was not only breaking the law, but he was bringing the administration of justice into disrepute. The Sheriff was giving the law the middle finger. He said, in effect, “Thanks so much for the Constitution, thanks also for a thousand years of legal wisdom, and thanks for all the deliberations of all of the legislators, but I know better. So shut up and let me do my job.”
Sheriff Joe was in rebellion against the lawful authority of his country. And last Friday the Donald said that’s OK with him.
Need I say more?
Tips from the Donald:
https://us12.admin.mailchimp.com/campaigns/show?id=1087461
Want to know more about Sheriff Joe?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio
My blogs (http://www.purposeful.ca/blog)