minor legal/political question

[kaigou]

For the US president to pardon someone, doesn't that someone have to be accused of a crime in the first place? How do you pardon someone who hasn't been charged with anything?

Comments

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

Thing is, a pardon is not a verdict of innocent. It's just a notice that the time you have served (any, or none if you're Nixon) is time enough. I recall my govt teacher in HS going on at some length about Ford pardoning Nixon -- and that it was far from the most popular act, as well -- but especially the fact that Nixon spent the rest of his life acting as though this pardon exonerated him from all wrong-doing. Pardons don't exonerate you, they simply grant that the time served has been sufficient.

IOW, Nixon remained an impeached president. No way getting around that. And your dad may have been pardoned but that doesn't make him less guilty (and thereby having rights reduced per any felon). I recall my govt teacher fussing the most, however, about how people never really 'understood' pardons and even less so thanks to Nixon's loud-mouthing about how the pardon 'proved' he wasn't a crook. So I'm not surprised your father would've been under the impression that he should have all rights per non-felon thanks to having been pardoned.

Which is why I'm baffled as to whether one can pardon in the absence of any charges let alone convictions: because pardoning says "the time served has been sufficient and you are free to go" and you can't have served time (by any measure) until/unless you've actually, y'know, been threatened with being carted off to jail.

I wonder where I can find a constitutional lawyer to ask. Hrmph. Unfortunately, I think my govt teacher is now on the AP Govt test-writing board and probably little free time for academic (err, so to speak) questions. On the other hand...

*googles*