Back when I lived in suburban Dallas and his Senate district covered part of our newspaper company's coverage area, he struck me as a decent guy.
But, deliberately blocking a vote on confirming John Bradley as the head of the Forensic Science Commission - a vote he knows Bradley will lose - just so that Bradley can chair the commission's final report meeting on Cameron Todd Willingham - is sick and wrong.
As the story notes, because some GOP state senators as well as all Democrats oppose Bradley, he'd lose a confirmation vote, and therefore would immediately lose his spot on the commission. The commission's April 14-15 meeting would likely then challenge how Bradley has forced the pace of its overview the science, or lack thereof, behind Willingham's murder conviction.
Deuell claims he doesn't want a new commission chairman to have to "start over."
He obviously doesn't want to see justice done, even belatedly.
A skeptical leftist's, or post-capitalist's, or eco-socialist's blog, including skepticism about leftism (and related things under other labels), but even more about other issues of politics. Free of duopoly and minor party ties. Also, a skeptical look at Gnu Atheism, religion, social sciences, more.
Note: Labels can help describe people but should never be used to pin them to an anthill.
As seen at Washington Babylon and other fine establishments
Pages
▼
Or is it that it would be better for this inarguably flawed report to end with its instigator, forced to defend it as he may, allowing the next commission chairman to use that ignominious end point as a beginning? Just suggesting an alternative perspective.
ReplyDelete