COCHRAN: Doesn't want to go to prison |
Cochran
has entered a “guilty” plea, and as expected is hoping his judge will be
sympathetic. Although some may say “delusional” would be a more accurate descriptive
term.
FOR
COCHRAN IS the alderman who earlier this year sent his attorney a written legal
brief in which he argued that prison time would be totally inappropriate. But
because he apparently got confused in sending out e-mail, a copy was sent to
the U.S. Probation Office.
For
as Cochran stated, his actions would constitute political corruption. And history
shows us that threats of incarceration haven’t done a thing discourage Chicago aldermen
(or elected officials from anywhere, actually) from doing things that federal
prosecutors believe do not serve the public good.
How
else to explain the dozens of former aldermen who wound up ending their time in
public service with a prison stint.
Cochran
argued that a period of home confinement (say, six months or so) would be a
more appropriate punishment for the alderman who solicited donations to provide
financial support for a back-to-school picnic, a senior citizen event for
Valentine’s Day and other holiday-type events.
PROSECUTORS,
HOWEVER, SAY that Cochran took the contributions, then used the money for
personal expenses.
Which
is why they whacked him with a criminal indictment, resulting in Cochran
entering a “guilty” plea back in March. No trial. A chance at a lesser sentence.
Sometimes, it seems these people don't understand the law |
Which
is why the Chicago Sun-Times has reported this week that federal prosecutors
are now demanding that Cochran get prison time.
THEY
WANT HIM to get something along the lines of an 18-month prison sentence, which
they say is close to the maximum sentence he could get. While admitting that if
Cochran keeps trying a legal strategy along the lines of “I’m guilty, but I
didn’t do it,” they’ll go for the max.
As
in two full years of prison time. Which would put Cochran in line with the many
other aldermen who wound up having to answer to the title of “inmate,” rather
than “counselor.”
It
would seem that Cochran has a tenuous grasp of what the law says, and means.
Which
shouldn’t be surprising. Because one of the things that has often amazed me through
all the years I have written about governing and the making of public policy is
just how little officials truly comprehend legal issues.
EVEN
THOUGH MANY of them are law school graduates and are certified to practice law,
it would seem what they truly grasp are the mechanizations of politics. Which
often differs greatly from what prosecutors will accept as legitimate.
These people want to criminalize govt. |
Hence,
the idea that some 30-plus aldermen ended up as criminals. That’s going back to
1973 – I’m sure the tally would be higher if you pushed the timeline back.
Although
then again, legal interpretations used to be looser so that actions we’d now
claim are criminal would have been regarded as legitimate, way back when.
Which
may well be why federal prosecutors said they plan to enter into evidence the
oaths of office that Cochran took when he became an alderman – perhaps they
think elected officials need a reminder that the old cliché “talk is cheap”
doesn’t apply, and that there’s a meaning to all the gibberish about “upholding”
the federal and state constitutions.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment