Kott asks judge to toss jury decision : comments
Posted by admin
Posted: October 9, 2007 - 3:37 pm
Return to Kott asks judge to toss jury decision
add new comment
8 October 9, 2007 - 4:26pm | metanoia2k
This Is An Interesting Legal Theory
Forget "intent", established by the Giver through confession; set aside "force and effect" revealed through recorded conversations in which Kott clearly establishes a "duty" to the Giver by reporting on PPT developments, there is no "nexus" because Pete Kott was a FRIEND?????
Based on this theory, the only time someone could be convicted of insider trading, corruption or abuse of office would be if they had no relationship other than the business of bribery...
I give Kott's lawyer snaps for trying. I guess he feels he's gotta do something for all the money he's being paid.
Politics is,by its nature, a process of "influence" and the leveraging of "relationships". The question before the court is not whether there was a warm and fuzzy relationship between the suckuh and the suckee but whether he performed his duty in a corrupt and criminal manner. Kott's efforts to engineer a shut-out of the House with no PPT bill and his breathless play-by-play reporting to "Uncle Bill" is enough of a nexus to satisfy me.
Whether one is a whore for pleasure, for money or for devotion, one are still a whore;peddling one's influence for the approval of the Pimp Daddy is no less corrupt than a straight quid pro quo. In this case, money may not have turned the wheel, but it sure greased it.
The evidence shows that Pete Kott saw his job was to stand and deliver for Bill Allen and he saw his role as a state legislator as means to that end. He was not elected to work for Bill Allen.
(Exit with banjo playing the theme from Deliverance)
edit | reply »