Somebody over at the Reality-Baseed Community described Alito as "a smart, decent, small man."
Seems right to me. In fact, the snippet of hearings I heard the other day made me wonder why all the news organizations and the blogosphere weren't discussing Alito's Dukakis moment.
Somebody at Daily Kos caught the transcript:
FEINGOLD: My question assumes that all that's been done and the process went through and there's no legal or constitutional or procedural problems, but evidence suddenly proves that the person convicted was unquestionably innocent.The question is: Does that person in that posture have a constitutional right not to be executed?
ALITO: Well, then the person would have to, as I said, file a petition. And if it was an initial petition, it would fall into one category. If it was a second or a successive petition, it would fall into another category and the person would have to satisfy the requirements the Congress has set out for filing a second or successive petition.
FEINGOLD: You can't say that the person has a constitutional right not to be executed?
ALITO: Well, I have to know the specific facts of the case and the way it works its way through the legal system. The rules here are complicated. A person has a right. It is one of the most fundamental rights that anybody has. It is a fundamental right and a fundamental objective of our judicial system that nobody is to be convicted without proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
And if there's evidence that the person is not guilty of the offense, then that gets to the very heart of what our whole system of criminal justice is designed to address.
He can't just say, "Yes, it's wrong."
No wonder Alito's wife cried. Somebody had to show some emotion.
