A Rose by Any Other Name Would Smell

The judge in the Rittenhouse murder trial refuses to allow the victims to be called victims.

The judge said: Don’t you call them victims, just because they was shot.

But you can call them looters, if that’s the word you care.

Attorney: But judgie they was murdered, in cold blood

In the street. They never stole a nickel, so that just don’t seem fair.

The judge: Well, they was demonstrating.

And marching in the street.

Attorney: But marching is all legal.

Just walking with your feet.

The judge: I call em as I see em. And when I see those folks

they look like their itchin for a fight.

Attorney: Not so, my judge, all they was doin

was exercising rights.

The judge: The right to march? well, maybe.

But I don’t like it none.

Attorney: Still, judge is that a reason to

Attack them with a gun?

The judge: The Rittenhouse boy was serving

the interests of the law.

Attorney: The tapes show something different.

Murder is what we saw.

The judge: No, the boy came here to help. To keep the peace

and help the police kick butt.

Attorney: He was a vigilante. A madman and a nut.

The judge: Watch your mouth, attorney, in my courtroom you say only words

that I allow, or else you have to pay.

Attorney: A victim is a victim, by any name you choose.

I expect there’ll be no justice if you control the words I say.

4 Comments

Filed under Politics

4 responses to “A Rose by Any Other Name Would Smell

  1. whungerford

    Can you join a crowd carrying a highly visible gun, shoot people you encounter whom you may see as threatening, and claim to have acted in self-defense? I believe that is the question confronting the jury.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Thank you for focusing on an important story that hasn’t received sufficient coverage/outrage. Alas, we are increasingly seeing the grievous results of the decades-long remaking of the judiciary into a blatantly anti-democratic, anti-judicious—indeed dangerous—force in our national life.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a comment