Our Judicial System Depends On Legal Precedent And That’s A Good Thing…Or Is It?

Seattle Mayor Says He’ll Resign after 5th Molestation Claim Surfaces

Here is an excerpt from a 9/12/17 news article…

“Seattle Mayor Ed Murray will resign the mayor’s office announced Tuesday afternoon hours after news broke that a fifth man has accused the mayor of molesting him as a child.

 

Murray said in a statement that he will resign effective 5 p.m. Wednesday. City Council President Bruce Harrell is expected to serve as mayor until the November election.

 

For months, Murray has faced allegations that he sexually abused homeless boys he encountered decades ago. On Wednesday, Murray’s cousin Joseph Dyer levied similar allegations, saying he felt moved to act because of Murray’s treatment of his accusers.”

------------------------

This is from a Web Site called The Eectric Law Library…

“PRECEDENT…Legal principle, created by a court decision, which provides an example or authority for judges deciding similar issues later. Generally, decisions of higher courts (within a particular system of courts) are mandatory precedent on lower courts within that system--that is, the principle announced by a higher court must be followed in later cases.

 

I only copied the beginning of the definition. As is normally the case with legalize, it goes on to be very confusing. If you want to get confused click here: http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/p069.htm  

------------------------

I state upfront I am not a lawyer. I, however, am an accomplished Blogger of Foolishness (Or Is It?). Here is my Foolish (Or Is It?) Commentary…

 

Focus your mind’s eye on the courtroom of Judge Elmer Fudd as the Defense Attorney, Snidley Whiplash, takes the floor…

 

Your honor, I am mystified that my client is being subjected to this ill advised court action. My client has admitted to 4 instances of Child Molestation. That fact being established and admitted to, may I draw the court’s attention to the case of Murray v A Whole Bunch Seattle’s Of Little Boys in 2017.

 

Legal Precedence clearly dictates that the threshold of justice has not been crossed until and after the 5^th child has been molested.

 

It is as plain as any case ever before this court that 4 is not 5 and until 5 is 5 it is still 4. Therefore, there exist no basis in the law to bring my sleazy client before this court or, dare I say, before any court of law across the Fruited Plain.

 

I ask the court to throw out this case based on Established Legal Precedence and issue an apology to my client.

 

As much as I am not in favor of bringing law suits against our Judicial System itself, I feel obligated to point out that I can definitely see the possibility of such a court action. I can see the headline clearly…

Sexual Harasser Files Law Suit Claiming Harassment of a Sexual Harasser Before He Has Admitted To All Of His Sexual Harassing

Would I kid u?

Smartfella