by HAL MOUNTSAUERKRAUTEN, Alternate Reality News Service Court Writer
A mistrial has been called in the case of Wally Ballouyahoothu, who had been charged with aggravated public annoyance and annoying public aggravation...with intent.
Third Circuit Bored (she really wants a promotion to a higher bench, people!) Judge Eleonora van Duseldorffer had no choice but to call the mistrial when she discovered that Mildred Awashinabey, one of the jurors, had met with counsel for the defence in order to plan their strategy.
"You're supposed to be impartial!" Judge van Duseldorffer shrieked...judicially. "You're not supposed to favour either side! What the hell were you thinking‽"
Awashinabey looked contrite. "I'm sorry, your Honouress. I know that Wally is guilty - I mean, the evidence - whoosh, howdy but it was convincing. But, gosh darknit, I really like the little lug."
"That's your excuse‽ You liked the guy‽" Judge van Duseldorffer looked like she was going to throw the book at the errant juror, but, because the clerk kept the Bible on his desk, was considering substituting her gavel for it.
"Well, no, Madame Honour," Awashinabey looked down and kicked dust up with the toe of her sensible shoe (somebody on the court cleaning staff should expect a sternly worded letter about this). "I thought it would be okay because Reduhblican Senators did it during the impeachment trial of President McDruhitmumpf. And, Reduhblican Senators would never do anything improper. Props?"
Judge van Duseldorffer stared gobsmacked at the juror for a couple of seconds, then looked like she wanted to slap her forehead with her palm, but was considering substituting her gavel for it.
The mistrial was a mercy, really.
The juror was referring to Senators Lindsey Grahamcrokercrum, Ted Downandmotleycrewz and Mike Leeleesobiesk, who met with the legal team for former President Ronald McDruhitmumpf the night before they were to start their defence. What do you think they were talking about? (HINT: it had nothing to do with their favourite mask design, although Leeleesobiesk really rocks the granite look.)
"The three Senators swore an oath to uphold the Constitution and be impartial jurors in the impeachment trial," pointed out token smart person Amy Sheshutshotshitbam. "They didn't just ignore the oath, they dismantled it, sold the parts for scrap and anonymously put the proceeds into a Super PAC to fund the President's legal defence!"
Worse, she added, the defence they contributed to was like a version of My Cousin Vinnie where the lawyers didn't get better by the end. Half of the three hour "defence" was repetition of a video that made Dumbopratic politicians look like high school cheerleaders ("Fight! Fight! Fight!" they kept saying - all that was missing was the entire squad shouting, "Goooooooooo Washburningdington weasels!") The rest of the defence amounted to lies ("Ignore all those MVGA hats and Confederate flags: the violence of January 6 was led by Antifa!"), damn lies ("Before the Qerfuffle at the Qapitol, President McDruhitmumpf told his followers to go in peace, wear flowers in their hair and don't try the brown acid, which is none too good!") and statistics ("The votes of 71 million Reduhblicans are being cancelled. Do you have any idea how big the stamp must be to cancel that many votes?").
"This is what the Senators risked censure and possible expulsion for?" token smart person Sheshutshotshitbam marvelled (but, not in a comic book sense - she's too mature for that). "They must want the 2024 Reduhblican Presidential nomination bad if they're willing to be Cousin Vinnie's handmaids!"
In a written statement after the mistrial, Judge van Duseldorffer marvelled (in a comic book sense only to the extent that she remembered her nerdy childhood fondly) that it was necessary. "From now on, I guess I will have to explicitly state that jurors may not communicate with counsel for the defence. It seemed obvious, but, well, this is the sort of thing that happens when politicians get involved with justice!
[What the hell, Hal? The story was highly...adequate, but what does the headline have to do with it? Or, for that matter, with anything? BRENDA BRUNDTLAND-GOVANNI]
Oh, yeah. Sorry, Brenda. I'm working from home, and my six year-old son was Petering me for attention hoping that I would play Pokeman Get Out of Here with him. So, I told him I was actually preparing an article on the game, I gave it that title to sell the story to him, then forgot to change it.
[Change it now. BB-G]
Sure sure. I was thinking of something like "A Poke in the Eye is Not the Way We Traditionally Conceive of Justice Being Blind." What do you think?