Tuesday, October 24, 2006

AG candidate says you get what you pay for

I really don't plan on blogging much about the current hotly contested AG race. I haven't heard either candidate talk about concerns about wrongful convictions, the importance of fair trials, or any sort of respect for our Constitutions. But I thought this Topeka Capital-Journal article included a sort of interesting passage. LL had criticized PMo for giving too sweet a deal to a defendant and PMo responded saying:
[PMo's] office negotiated plea agreements with [defendants], but the Democrat said the deals were the only way to ensure [defendant] -- who admitted to beating [victim] to death -- would see prison time.

"It was very difficult because it was circumstantial," [PMo] said in a statement. "And we were up against a team of high-powered, high-paid and highly talented attorneys."

I know the public defenders in Olathe and know that they are high-powered and highly talented, but also know that they are not high-paid, so I don't think he is referring to them. I guess I just think this just sort of remark is sort of a back-handed slap against public defenders and/or appointed counsel. (I.e. if you don't pay, you don't get much). Any thoughts? Maybe I'm overreacting.

No comments: