[Lotus]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

The defendant here was indicted "speedily" and since then he and his representatives have been in front of the court with pleadings for things like access to proseuction evidence (discovery) and the like. That means the legal process has been done at a sufficient pace to match the concept of a "speedy trial".

That would likely not be the case if the defendant had been arrested 4 years ago and put in a dungeon somewhere and on April 16 2012 he would see the light of day and the inside of a court room for the first time.

The other adjective you used was "fair". The defendant has to have a fair trial too and probably a "fair" trial is a tad more important than a "speedy" trial.

I totally agree on the part about fairness. If time is needed to ensure fairness, that time should be taken.

But, still, the speedy indictment which you mention is not the same as a speedy trial. My understanding is that there have been big gaps of time over the last 4 years when investigation, discovery, etc., were not being actively pursued. Dead time works against the notion of speed.