Living Constitution blog 9: The 6th Amendment

1) Source: News Article
Title: Right to a speedy trial not violated by eight-year wait, court rules
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2010/07/right_to_a_speedy_trial_not_vi.html 
2) Constitutional Connection: Amendment 6, "Right to a Speedy Trial"


3) Explanation:

         In this article, it explains why an eight-year wait for a trail was not considered unconstitutional. In the case two men were being accused of capital murder. After the two men had stayed in jail for a couple of years, they changed it to second-degree murder. A lawyer tried to argue that these two men being in jail for so long without being given a trial is unconstitutional and their case should be thrown away. The lawyer also said their case should be thrown away because since the defendants were in jail so long they can no longer defend themselves in court.The court ruled in favor that their wait in jail was constitutional because they said that they should still be able to defend themselves in court. They said that one of the defendants was also paying an attorney during the times of hurricane Katrina to postpone his trial, so it isn't just the court that was holding off on their trial.

      The article relates to the constitution because it deals with Amendment 6. It relates to the 6th amendment because it talks about whether an eight-year wait on a trial was constitutional or not. An example from the article would be that the ruling. The ruling was the eight-year wait was still considered constitutional and the trial is still relevant. There was a lot of debate on whether or not the defendants being in jail for so long prevented them from being able to defend themselves. Which the Supreme Court didn't find true, and said the defendants should be fine in a trial.

       In my opinion I feel the ruling of this case was constitutional, and the Supreme Court made the right decision. I feel of one of the defendants hadn't tried to pay an attorney to postpone their trial then it should have ruled unconstitutional. But I also believe since they lost a lot of their witnesses during Hurricane Katrina, they won't really have a strong case to prove the defendants guilty. I also feel that in the charges that the two defendants are facing, they should still be tried in a court of law, because if they were let free no matter how much time they were in jail with out a trail, who knows if they will go right back out there and start killing again.