Adam Laird: Part 2
I'm a bit disappointed with the Times- Standard's second part of the Adam Laird prosecution. I'd hoped to see a little more regarding the incident he's being charged with. Perhaps some information from the prosecutorial side rather than just the defense. That didn't happen. We just got more along the same line as in part 1, that being claims of the charges being some sort of political retribution.
There's certainly a story to be told about the inner squabbling within the Eureka Police Department, but I'm not sure just how much that has to do with Laird being prosecuted. After all, even if he was set up and treated differently than other officers might have been, that seems a separate issue as far as his guilt or innocence of the criminal charges.
For example; If other officers might not have been prosecuted for doing the same sort of thing, maybe they should have been? Assuming he was treated differently, does that amount to reason for acquittal? Maybe his lawyer can make that case. I don't know.
It does give the defense the advantage of muddling issues and perhaps raising doubt towards his accusers. I'm not sure the prosecution can really counter this. If they try to argue against political prosecution in court, that will just muddle things up more which might benefit the defense.
It does seem from what I've read as if there were, and are, a number of people within EPD that wanted Laird out of there. Whether their reasons are valid or not, we'll likely never know.