Trending ›
Unless were talking Charlize Theron in Monster, we don’t hear much about death row here at Socialitelife. Unless, there is of course, a ridiculously scandalous back-story involved.
Enter Charles Hood – man sentenced to death in Texas for the 1989 murder of Tracie Lynn Wallace and her boyfriend. Which, on it’s own, isn’t that much of a story. But it turns out the prosecutor and judge presiding over the case were DOING it. In the chambers and everything. They probably got their gross sex juices all over court proceedings which many innocent (or arguably guilty) people had to handle.
Anyway, the Supreme Court rejected Hood’s appeal, despite the unearthed information about the inappropriate affair going on between Judge Verla Sue Holland and district attorney Tom O’Connell.
I’m not saying Hood isn’t guilty, but I think the guy deserves a new trial without people boning all over his constitutional rights. If I was the prosecutor and my butt-buddy was the judge, you better believe I wouldn’t let him embarrass me in a huge trial – and I have that much faith in the rest of humanity.
His appeal was most likely denied because the Appellate Court judge did not find error in the judge’s conduct. A mere presumption of bias is a potential professional ethics violation for the judge and prosecutor but does not necessarily mean any bias affected the judge’s performance of his duties.
Also, remember that criminal trials are decided by a JURY, not a judge.
People are often quick to be outraged by stories about criminal proceedings in the media without a full understanding of the facts, the law or proceedings.