Updike's Magnificent Easter Poem

My friend and law partner Luther Munford sent me this fantastic piece by the late John Updike, one of 20th Century America's greatest authors, and active practitioner of Protestant faith and freedom:

Seven Stanzas at Easter
By John Updike

Make no mistake: if He rose at all
it was as His body;
if the cells' dissolution did not reverse, the molecules reknit,
the amino acids rekindle,
the Church will fall.

It was not as the flowers,
each soft Spring recurrent;
it was not as His Spirit in the mouths and fuddled
eyes of the eleven apostles;
it was as His Flesh: ours.

The same hinged thumbs and toes,
the same valved heart
that — pierced — died, withered, paused, and then
regathered out of enduring Might
new strength to enclose.

Let us not mock God with metaphor,
analogy, sidestepping transcendence;
making of the event a parable, a sign painted in the
faded credulity of earlier ages:
let us walk through the door.

The stone is rolled back, not papier-mache,
not a stone in a story,
but the vast rock of materiality that in the slow
grinding of time will eclipse for each of us
the wide light of day.

And if we will have an angel at the tomb,
make it a real angel,
weighty with Max Planck's quanta, vivid with hair,
opaque in the dawn light, robed in real linen
spun on a definite loom.

Let us not seek to make it less monstrous,
for our own convenience, our own sense of beauty,
lest, awakened in one unthinkable hour, we are
embarrassed by the miracle,
and crushed by remonstrance.

Telephone Poles and Other Poems © 1961 by John Updike.

WTF??? Obama SG to SCOTUS: Let Cops End-Run Lawyers of Suspects

SCOTUSblog reports a disappointing development: the United States of America, through Obama Administration's Solicitor General, is arguing that law enforcement should be allowed to question suspects even after they have had lawyers appointed for them. As SCOTUSblog explains:

"The U.S. Solicitor General, speaking for the federal government, urged the Supreme Court on Tuesday to overrule its 1986 decision in Michigan v. Jackson. Seeking to assure that the right to counsel is not lost during police interrogation, the Court ruled in Jackson that, once an accused has claimed that right in court, any waiver of that right during police questioning would not be valid unless the individual initiated communication with the officers."

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/us-challenges-michigan-v-jackson

The Government's amicus brief was filed in the case of Montejo v. Louisiana (07-1529), which was argued last January. The Supreme Court, in an unusual move, asked for supplemental briefing on whether Jackson should be overruled. The Obama Administration said it should, explaining:

“Although the Sixth Amendment affords criminal defendants a right to counsel at certain critical pre-trial stages, the Amendment should not prevent a criminal defendant from waiving that right and answering questions from police following assertion of that right at arraignment. Jackson serves no real purpose and fits poorly with this Court’s recent precedent; although the decision only occasionally prevents federal prosecutors from obtaining appropriate convictions, even that cost outweighs the decision’s meager benefits.”

The answer to this argument was put rather well by Justice Souter and four other members of the Court just last Monday. In Corley v. United States, the Court refused to overrule another longstanding rule -- the exclusion of confessions taken when the suspect has been detained for an unreasonable amount of time without being taken to Court for an initial appearance. [Note: this is called the McNabb-Mallory rule]. The Court's majority opinion, written by Justice Souter, said:

"In a world without McNabb-Mallory, federal agents would be free to question suspects for extended periods before bringing them out in the open, and we have always known what custodial secrecy leads to. No one with any smattering of the history of 20th-century dictatorships needs a lecture on the subject, and we understand the need even within our own system to take care against going too far. Custodial police interrogation, by its very nature, isolates and pressures the individual, and there is mounting empirical evidence that these pressures can induce a frighteningly high percentage of people to confess to crimes they never committed, see, e.g., Drizin & Leo, The Problem of False Confessions in the Post-DNA World, 82 N. C. L. Rev. 891, 906-907 (2004). "

Justice Frankfurter's point in McNabb is as fresh as ever: "The history of liberty has largely been the history of observance of procedural safeguards."

Thanks, Justice Souter. In real life, unlike Law & Order, law enforcement can not be sure they have the right suspect. Letting them question someone in custody after they already have a lawyer -- which violates the whole raison d'etre of the right to counsel -- leads all too often to the conviction of the innocent.

This is a very distressing sign that it's "business as usual" at the Obama Justice Department -- that it's more important to show solidarity with prosecutors than it is to seek justice. What a shame.

Correction -- Error in Post on Paul Minor case

In yesterday's post about the Fifth Circuit's denial of Paul Minor's renewed motion for release pending appeal, I stated that "[t]he Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Paul Minor's request for bond pending appeal, then also denied his request for a brief furlough to visit his wife."

As Alan Lange of Y'all Politics has pointed out, that is not correct. The Fifth Circuit denied Minor's first request for release on bond pending appeal, and then more recently, denied a renewed motion for release on bond based on the circumstances of Mrs. Minor's illness.

Y'all Politics' post on the issue is here:
http://yallpolitics.com/index.php/yp/post/15577/#43620

I wish the Court had granted the motion; it seems to me that the original offense for which Minor's bond was revoked in the District Court -- using alcoholic beverages -- has long sense been adequately punished. Serious issues regarding the jurisdiction of the Federal courts have been raised, and although questioning during appellate argument is not an indicator of the ultimate result of any case, it appears that, at least, the judges on the Fifth Circuit panel are concerned about this question.

However, my statement about what the Fifth Circuit denied was erroneous. I regret the error and stand corrected.

Is The President Tough Enough For You Now, Kingfish?

Kingfish, the host of local blog Jackson Jambalaya, posted a rather incendiary suggestion on Sunday, titled, "Dear POTUS, Here's How a REAL Leader Dealt With Pirates." The whole post is here: http://kingfish1935.blogspot.com/

His general notion is that the President should follow the example of Julius Caesar, who according to Plutarch, had pirates executed by cruxifiction. Kingfish finishes:

"Perhaps the pussy-in-chief should take some lessons from Caesar instead of finding this 'annoying' as Reuters reported. Several crosses with pirates hanging from them on the Somali coast will get their attention more quickly than will a nuanced discussion about habeas corpus or other fancy Latin lingo."

I don't think the words "Navy SEAL Snipers" can be considered "fancy Latin lingo." But I'm sure the operation (personally approved by the President) won't be enough to convince our friends on the Right. They'd rather have a Caesar: a military dictator who ruled by force. Great plan.

Innocent Victims of the Criminal Justice System

Sylvia Minor, who had celebrated 41 years of marriage to her husband Paul, died today. The story from the Clarion-Ledger is here:

http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20090414/NEWS/90414019

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Paul Minor's request for bond pending appeal, then also denied his request for a brief furlough to visit his wife. Predictably, some folks are posting that this is just what he deserves. One visitor to the Clarion-Ledger even said:

"His actions probably contributed to the growth of the tumor with all the stress he caused her. She was better off by him not being there & he got exactly what he deserved."

I rather doubt Mrs. Minor would have said that. She was the innocent victim in all of this.

Another said, "The BOP doesn't let inmates out for this kind of thing, as a general rule. The inmate or family have to pay for transport and pay for guards to travel with the inmate."

True enough. But is that the right policy?

Does anyone understand what incarceration is supposed to accomplish? If so, perhaps they can explain how extinguishing all family ties and feelings will serve whatever the purpose is supposed to be.

And let's not forget . . . the Fifth Circuit has raised some very serious questions about whether the Federal courts have jurisdiction over this alleged offense. The two judges who were allegedly bribed were STATE court judges, who allegedly skewed STATE court proceedings in Paul Minor's favor. Pray tell, why is this a Federal offense?

And if Minor has a strong argument that he should never have been tried by the Federal Court, and is later released, how can his wife's loss of his comfort in her dying months be justified?

I think we are a better nation than this.

Paul Minor Oral Argument: Reports

The Jackson Free Press and the blog NMissCommentator have written helpful summaries of the oral arguments in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in United States v. paul Minor, et al.

The JFP story is here: http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/index.php/site/comments/judge_recuses_herself_from_minor_appeal_040209/

NMC's story is here: http://nmisscommentor.com/?p=659

Jackson's Groundhog Election Day? Opinion Poll By Neutral Consultant Shows H. Johnson, Crisler, and Horhn chasing Mayor Melton for Lead

My friend Brad Chism, President of the political consulting firm Zata3, has just released the results of a 500+ person poll in the Jackson mayoral race. Brad says that:

"We have several friends in the Jackson Mayor’s race but no candidates who are clients. We are intrigued by the dynamics of this race and have decided to do some survey work for public dissemination.

Wednesday night we conducted a random sample survey of 500 Jackson voter households. We asked about candidate preference and strength of support."

The main results:


Melton is in first place with 27% of total respondents. 35% of his supporters are "absolutely sure" they will vote for him.


H. Johnson is the lead challenger, with 20% of the total. 21% of his supporters are "absolutely sure."


Crisler is in a close third with 18% of total. 13% of his supporters are "absolutely sure."

Horhn is at a surprising 6%, with only 5% of his supporters saying they are "absolutely sure" they will vote for him.

Fair is right behind Horhn with 5% of the total; 6% of his supporters are "absolutely sure."

All Others split 11% of the total; 12% were undecided.


Brad gives us some brief observations:


"The race is very fluid. Based on this work and other surveys we have seen, at least four people are seriously in contention for the runoff."

"As Jere Nash observed recently, Frank Melton’s trial and the flap over his residency may have boosted his numbers considerably. (This survey occurred on Wednesday-- Melton hired a new police chief that day) ." Note: this is a point that several of us have already made. See http://jimcraigsworld.blogspot.com/2009/03/return-to-never-neverland.html


Brad continues:


"If the election were today, Melton would almost certainly be in the runoff. A rematch from 4 years ago is not implausible.


This will all change a lot when the candidates go up on TV and radio and hit the streets with canvassers.


Again, this is all fluid. For example, a few minutes ago Crisler got McMillan’s endorsement and we understand that fundraising is beginning to pick up for Crisler, Hohrn and Johnson.


About the survey. This sample of 500 voter phone households includes 70 completed surveys in Ward 1 and 65 in each of the other wards. This is a rough approximation of historical voter registration and turnout. We have not weighted the survey by voter frequency, gender or age. The pivot tables in the attached chart may be manipulated to see ward-by-ward results. We caution you not to draw too many conclusions by ward as these sample sizes are small. You can also adjust the pivot tables to see survey results by race.

Methodology. We used an interactive, automated call with keypad responses to record results. As the name suggests, our ZATAPULSE takes the pulse of the electorate. It is not an “MRI”. It is a useful tool for short surveys of this nature and has been used in more than 200 races across the country. We employ the same methodology as Survey USA or Rasmussen. Still, the tool has limits. We caution you that this race is very fluid and that each candidate is likely to have a more robust, internal poll. Nonetheless, we are confident that this is the most accurate, timely information that is publicly available.

About Zata3. Zata3 is a political consulting firm for Democratic candidates and progressive causes. Company President Brad Chism splits time between his Washington, DC and Jackson, MS offices. For each of the last three years, Zata3 had won more awards by the AAPC for its telephone voter contact programs than any other firm in America.

For more information, go to www.zata3.com"


The Takeaway Point From the Survey: So if the election were held today, the Democratic runoff would be between Mayor Melton and former Mayor Johnson. A "Groundhog Day" election . . . which Jackson may be doomed to repeat again and again?