As reported last week in the City Weekly, the state of Zion dispenses with due process when it comes to stopping gentile joys. It is illegal for a bar to serve an intoxicated patron. The State enforces this law by detailing a squad of officers to monitor drinking at bars, and reporting violations to the Department of Acoholic Beverages Control. DABC issues a notice and the bar owner appears before an administrative law judge. If a formal hearing is held, there is discovery. It has been over a year since a formal hearing was held, because DABC doesn't like the ideas of evidence or discovery. Alternatively, enforcement is through an informal hearing, for which there is no mandatory (or indeed any) discovery. (Alarms are starting to ring.) So, in brief, the story reports one enforcement action in which the officers failed to identify four out of five of the allegedly drunk consumers. The one who was identified was found not to be intoxicated (but that was by a real judge in a real court, so it doesn't count). The bar nevertheless was fined and license was suspended despite the absence of anyone actually be adjudged intoxicated, despite the testimony of patrons, including life-time police officers, that no one was seen to be intoxicated, and that no citation was issued until 45 days after the alleged infractions (insuring there would be few or no records available, including video), and despite the complete absence of any evidence aside from the unsupported assertions of the officers. Well, here, a short excerpt, which gives a fair sense of justice in Zion when it comes gentile enjoyments:
Without any objective evidence to test, Flores was left to attack the credibility of the state agents. He was able to track down two of the five remaining allegedly intoxicated patrons. “Bob” and “Ozzie”—aka Bob Lundy and Kenneth Osborne—both testified contrary to state agents, but to no avail.
Among the signs of intoxication Lundy displayed: his “face was flushed, he had red eyes, his speech was very exaggerated and loud,” Agent M.K. Hardie reported.
Lundy testified that the reason he might have appeared “flushed” was that he had a tanning booth in his basement, and before setting out for the Matchbox that night, he played 18 holes of golf under the June sun. And the red eyes? That was easy: The Matchbox is a downright smoky club, not to mention Lundy was a little emotional over the death of Rich’s brother, who was also a friend. And Lundy testified that he was loud, and “obnoxious,” because he was trying to yell over the blaring music.
What’s more, Rich says, “They said that ... one of our employees who worked as a doorman, served draft beer to a customer [Lundy] who doesn’t drink draft beer, from a bar that doesn’t serve draft beer.” Indeed, Lundy testified that he never drinks draft beer, only “7 and Coke.” Ickes ruled that Lundy was credible in testifying that he didn’t buy draft beer from the east bar, as reported by one agent. After all, that bar didn’t even have a tap. But Ickes decided Lundy was not credible in testimony stating he hadn’t had draft beer at all, because “the agent had frequent and close contact with him that evening,” Ickes ruled.
Justice at work in the fields of the lord. Oh, by the way, not one member of DABC is a gentile, and, best I can tell, none ever consume alcohol. Coincidence, I am sure. (There is only one gentile on the State Supreme Court, also a curiosity of demographics.)
Recent Comments