Non attorneys should not criticize the process. No one can be accused
without the right to face the accuser and to not only hear what was said, but
to respond. For reasons known only to those who conducted the hearing, Helen
was cut off and for an hour and a half, the board exchanged allegations,
and discussed the punishment with her not being allowed to hear what is being
said.
If you want to talk about the law, that would be like charging someone,
then not allowing them to hear what is said at trial, then making a decision,
and keep it secret from everyone, even telling the accused not to tell
anyone what happened.
That may have worked in a dictatorship, but it is not how it should be
done in America. Or, at the GSDCA.
Evan L.Ginsburg
_Click here: 2014 GSDCA NATIONAL - THE UNOFFICAL NATIONAL SITE_
(http://gsdnational.blogspot.com/)
_Click here: GSD Youth Recognition Fund_
(http://www.dogshowjuniors.com/jindex.html)
_Click here: Welcome to Asgard's German Shepherds
In a message dated 9/21/2016 7:43:40 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
wynsum@xxxxxxx writes:
Then like in a jury trial, the jurors review the evidence, and vote to
acquit or not, if not then a
penalty phase begins
Evan, when was the last time, lawyers and defendents etc were in a jury
room?
_ (http://www.asgardgsd.com/)
