To the editor:
Only lawyers could twist the U.S. justice system into a parody of justice by creating the word "proffered" as a legal deconstructionist term to justify a motion in limine.
When is a confession to a crime in the presence of lawyers, not a confession? It is when the confession is "proffered."
A local lawyer is being prosecuted for trivial crimes at the local federal courthouse. Crimes are trivial when there has been no: physical violence, significant money or property stolen or damaged, serious perjury or threats, or coercion.
Surely the use of the 5th Amendment would have been a better defense than the gambit of a "proffered" statement, although most judges view the use of the 5th as an admission of guilt. Judges have ruled it an admission of guilt in civil cases.
So far, this case (U.S. v. Gary Peel) has progressed similarly to the Bud Abbot-Lou Costello comedy skit, "Who's on First."
Hollywood may take note and grind out another senseless pulp using this case as a script.
Cognizant courthouse watchdogs eagerly await titillating performances by the defendant, defense lawyer, prosecutor and judge.
Charles D. Sullivan