‘Following the Law’

I am an attorney highly upset with certain outspoken groups of people, which include district attorneys, who are blatantly out after the scalps of Justices Rose Elizabeth Bird, Cruz Reynoso, Stanley Mosk and Allen B. Boussard.

Two sickening tragedies occured when the Supreme Court reversed the conviction of Theodore F. Frank for the brutal murder of Amy Sue Sietz: (1) the execution of this perverted maniac has been postponed or perhaps worse, prevented from ever happening, and (2) Rose Bird, in particular, and Justices Mosk, Reynoso, and Boussard will and are once again being unjustifiably and foolishly blamed for the mistakes of law enforcement in apprehending the prosecuting dangerous criminals.

It is not the Supreme Court’s fault that over-zealous police officers coerce a confession out of a defendant, nor is it the Supreme Court’s fault if the police engage in unlawful searches and seizures. Why is it so difficult to grasp this distinction? It is not only unfortunate, but also outrageous in my mind that law enforcement people who have the obligation to properly investigate and prosecute criminals want to make the Supreme Court the scapegoat when criminals get new trials because their constitutional rights were violated.

A Ventura district attorney, outraged at the reversal of Frank’s conviction, makes this statement: “If this court (the Supreme Court) is not willing to execute somebody like this, who will they be willing to execute?”

What kind of nonsense is that statement? It is not a question of whether the Supreme Court is willing or unwilling to execute someone, as some people would like the general public to believe. The court found that the prosecutor used illegally seized evidence to convince jurors to sentence a human being to death. The fact that this ruthless murderer has to be tried over again as to the penalty phase of the case is not because the Supreme Court used illegally seized evidence or that they are unwilling to “execute” somebody, but because law enforcement illegally seized evidence.

The California Supreme Court is the watchdog of our constitutional rights. Fair-minded judges and the rule of law are what separate us from Nazi Germany and other like police states. While the electric chair and/or the gas chamber are too good for the likes of Theodore F. Frank and his kind, the blame for the reversal of his conviction lies not with the judges who protect our constitutional rights, but rather with those who foul up the prosecution of criminals by failing to adhere to well established rules of law.

I suggest that those responsible for eliminating monsters like Theodore Frank from society concentrate on the job of prosecuting him according to the rules and get off the backs of those judges who must continue to do their job of protecting the rights of individuals regardless of the consequences.

NED P. REILLY

Santa Ana