(Who benefits from the hanging [read - "lynching of"] John Schultz?) This is another way to look at the issue that will not die. There are people not happy with Councilman John Schultz’s eligibility for pre-trial intervention. Mr. Schultz was involved in the revealing video taping of Council colleague Eugene Robinson participating in sexuallyactivity not in keeping with his public character. There is a side issue of whether or not Eugene Robinson committed official misconduct by using his city vehicle to drive to-and-from an out-of-town motel with a woman he “picked-up” to “hook-up.” The issue of official misconduct is not being investigated, but John Schultz involvement in the video taping of Councilman Eugene Robinson’s promiscuity is under the highest of scrutiny.
The political lynching of John Schultz amounts to changing his charge from a 3rd or 4th degree offense to a 2nd degree offense. Mr. Schultz offense does not merit a 2nd degree charge. The law is that simple. Those advocates of giving Mr. Schultz a Draconian Punishment have some motivation for doing so. It is possible that both community leaders and the editorial board of the Press of Atlantic City are misreading the law and facts of this case. It is also possible that the advocates of worsening John Schultz already-public humiliation and punishment have ulterior motives.
Now, return to the old principle of Roman jurisprudence found in the blog post title, Cui Bono. Opponents of John Schultz certainly benefit from a 2nd degree charge, which would force Councilman Schultz to resign his seat on Council. Seth Grossman argues
Maybe Councilman John Schultz of Atlantic City is guilty of a crime of the 4th degree, maybe a crime of the 3rd degree. He helped edit a videotape showing fellow councilman, Gene Robinson, in a compromised position. Any citizen with a clean record is entitled to pre-trial intervention for that type of offense. But the Press of Atlantic City demands that Schultz be indicted for a 2d degree crime (the same as rape, murder, or terrorism). That would bar him from pretrial intervention, and force his resignation. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT SUCH A CHARGE. Click here for details.
Who really wants Schultz forced off City Council, and why? This would not be related to the key city council vote on who gets the multibillion dollar rights to Bader Field development, would it?
It is not quite certain which developers Councilmen are lining up behind for the Badar Field. We will keep everyone posted on allegiances to proposals as they develop. In the meantime, ask yourself, “Cui Bono?” while watching both the John Schultz affair and Badar Field development.