Experts divided on victims’ kin speaking at Catherine Greig hearing

[Singo]

[img]http://multimedia.heraldinteractive.com/images/20110712/83a1c6_122104Whiteymf07.jpg[/img]
[i]Catherine Greig portrait. Ugh[/i]

[quote] A federal judge could be “opening a door that we may all regret someday” if she allows the families of accused mass murderer James “Whitey” Bulger’s alleged victims to have a say in Whitey moll Catherine Greig’s bail hearing today, a former state police detective turned attorney cautioned yesterday, while prosecutors and experts counter victim testimony is entirely appropriate.

“I’ve never seen anything like it. (Greig) enjoys the presumption of innocence, which seems to have been somewhat forgotten in this hysteria,” attorney Robert Jubinville, who is not involved in the case, said of the decision U.S. Magistrate Judge Jennifer C. Boal is due to make at this morning’s continuation of Greig’s detention hearing in U.S. District Court.

The 19 gruesome killings for which Bulger, 81, is charged occurred before he and the Quincy dental hygienist fled in January 1995. Captured last month with Bulger in California, Greig, 60, is charged only with harboring a federal fugitive.

Victim-impact statements — often gripping, emotional and dripping with anger — are typically permitted at sentencing hearings after a defendant is convicted. But Susan Howley, director of public policy for the National Center for Victims of Crime, said under federal law, because public safety is also a factor in granting bail, victims “do have a right to be reasonably heard at any hearing regarding release.”

Greig’s lawyer Kevin Reddington argued in court papers that to let the families speak because her lover was “a man of almost mythic proportions ... flies in the face of the very bedrock of constitutional principles of our criminal justice system.”

Prosecutors countered: “Not only have those family members suffered the emotional trauma from the violence that was done to the victims as alleged in the case against Bulger, but for 16 years they lived with the anguish that Bulger might never be found. That harm — in and of itself — permits them to speak as ‘crime victims’ in this case.”

Jubinville suggested family statements could sway a judge emotionally in a matter that should be focused on only whether a defendant is dangerous or might run if bailed. And he said it could set a bad precedent.

“OK, she’s connected to Whitey Bulger,” Jubinville said. “The question before the court is whether she’s going to appear for proceedings in the future, and that is really the only question. She has no record. No one can say she was involved in any violence. . . . It is opening a door that we may all regret someday.”
[/quote]

[sir whoopsalot]

[quote]Greig’s lawyer Kevin Reddington argued in court papers that to let the families speak because her lover was “a man of almost mythic proportions ... flies in the face of the very bedrock of constitutional principles of our criminal justice system.”[/quote]

So killing 19 people makes this guy a hero or something?
Honestly, am I the only one who fails to grasp the concept behind this?