In essence, because of the weird change in the law in 1997, Harold Fish had to prove his innocence. An extremely hostile prosecutor made this virtually impossible.
The legislature has now changed the law three times to try to rectify the injustice. The first time, the judge and prosecutor said it did not apply to the Fish case, even though the legislature passed it before the trial and in such a way as to make it immediately effective. The second time, the legislature said, effectively, "We mean it!" and Governor Janet Napolitano vetoed it. This is the third time, and we will see what Janet does.
My question is: What does she have against Harold Fish?
Is it just that he had the gall to defend himself? Or does she owe the prosecutor in this case something? After all, she was a Clinton appointed prosecutor herself.
Apparently, the legislature itself has a hard time "changing the law". If it wasn't for Fish's railroading, it would be entertaining.
Well, we wouldn’t want to inconvenience this Unclesbay apparatchik with something like justice would we?
Just think, his numbers might go down and it could affect his career! Something has to be done about these people constantly whining about rights and justice.
This may explain why Dorothythompson came on and posted.