Senator Santorum

[Terry Lambert]

Doug Barton wrote:
> On Tue, 6 May 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:
> > If you are thinking of the (relatively) recent media feeding
> > frenzy, it was not a courts-marshall over adultery, per se,
> > it was a courts-marshall over disobeying a direct order to not
> > engage in adultery.  That's a totally different issue (Article
> > 15).  The media made it about adultry, because adultry was more
> > salable to their consumers than the reality.
> 
> No, there are actually penalties in the UCMJ for adultery, but like I
> said, I'm far from an expert. As I understand it, they generally involve
> stacking poo onto the pile for people who shouldn't have been involved
> anyway, but I grew up in a navy town, and I used to hear about this kind
> of thing fairly regularly.

I understand that; it was just if you had that particular case
in mind.

I rather imagine that; just as in the civilian justice systems
in the various states, you could argue against such charges on
the basis of "selective enforcement".

I'm waiting for someone to win a state murder conviction, lose
a federal civil rights conviction for the same crime, fight it
under double jeoparday, and win.  Then I will be happy about
"stacking poo" no longer being possible.

-- Terry