etee's Blog

I read with interest this article in the Houston Chronicle today:

Seven police officers were indicted Thursday on murder or attempted murder charges in shootings on a bridge that left two people dead during the chaotic aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

As is now often the case, you get competing statements, as each side attempts to try the case in the media garner support for their side.

First, the prosecution:

"We cannot allow our police officers to shoot and kill our citizens without justification like rabid dogs," District Attorney Eddie Jordan said.

Next, the defense:

"As a wise man once said, a district attorney can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich," said Franz Zibilich, attorney for officer Robert Faulcon, who faces two counts of first-degree murder and four counts of attempted first-degree murder.

And, the obligatory "pot...kettle...black" moment:

[Police Superintendent] Riley called Jordan's comments "highly unprofessional, highly prejudicial and highly undignified."

Unlike, for example, looting, going AWOL in an emergency, or beating up a 64-year old retired schoolteacher. Or, maybe aiming at a dog and shooting yourself in the foot, eh, Mr. Superintendent?

And, as usual, Polimom weighed in with her two cents on the topic:

[snark] Voters distrustful of police officers? In New Orleans??? [/snark]

But the reputation of the New Orleans police is also meat for this sandwich. Their problems are legendary, and the distrust and hostility between those who have sworn to protect, and those they serve, is so profound, it’s beyond me how there could possibly be a fair and impartial jury in Orleans Parish… or how they’ll distinguish between fact and fiction if they do.

However, I want to change the topic a moment, and explore something that has been bugging me ever since I first heard that "a district attorney can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich" quote:

Why would a rabid dog shoot anyone, and then try to frame a ham sandwich?

Why would a grand jury indict a ham sandwich?

And, if indicted, where would you find a jury of its peers to try a ham sandwich?

And, if you could overcome these barriers, and somehow manage to secure a conviction, just how the heck to you go about executing the durn thing? By the time the appeals process is complete, it will have rotted in prison (quite literally), but even if you expedite the process like they are doing with Saddam, what do you do next -- give it a last meal (of what?), dress it up with a dab of fresh mustard, wrap it in two slices of whole grain bread, then FRY THE SUCKA?!?

Enquiring minds want to know.