One of the first things that any lawyer learns is that every case is different. This is especially true in criminal cases where a slight change in facts is the difference in whether the defendant’s guilt was established beyond a reasonable doubt. In addition, conduct which we may find morally bankrupt may not be criminal. Even if the conduct falls within a particular statute, it does not automatically mean that the person will be charged with a crime. The bottom line for whether to proceed with charging a person is whether the prosecution could win a conviction. Thus, it is foolhardy for those to claim that there is a double standard and that it is based on politics when they have no idea what the law is or what the investigation has so far shown, including whether those in law enforcement reasonably believe would be the outcome if charges were brought. If it is true when the conduct occurs in one jurisdiction, how much more so it is true when you are comparing jurisdictions such as different states or state and federal. 

Although that I am aware that my positions on various issues, especially those concerning Donald Trump, cause extreme reaction in many people, it is rare that anyone on the street comes over to me to say anything. A few weeks ago, someone stopped me on Main Street to chastise me for criticizing Rabbi Yoel Schonfeld. What upset him was not the merits of my criticism but the fact that I criticized him. I learned two things from the incident. One, it shows the devotion that this individual has for Rabbi Schonfeld, and two, that disagreeing with someone is considered by some people as equivalent to a personal attack. The irony, I told the person, is that Rabbi Schonfeld never looked at it that way. Unlike other individuals who I was not sure of their reaction if I disagreed with them, I knew that Rabbi Schonfeld would not take it personally, so that was why I would name him in my column.

A few weeks ago, I wrote about my experience during my bike ride when I was unable to continue bike riding due to Achilles tendonitis. One of the remedies is rest. I was upset that I would not be able to bike on Sunday for a few weeks. Right after that happened, for the first time I can recall, three Sundays in a row I went to a bris. I would not have ridden on July 17 because of Shiv’a Asar b’Tamuz, a fast day. I most likely would have wanted to go biking on the other two Sundays if not for the injury. Then I would have been in the position to choose between going to the bris or a ride that I had signed up for. My inability to ride made the choice to go to the bris easy. It is just another example of when something occurs that appears to be upsetting, it ends up being for the best because that is Hashem’s plan. Meanwhile, I bought bike shoes and have slowly started to ride again.

Before I get to the main part of this column, there is one story that shows the mixed-up priorities in this country. There has been a full-court press to try to put pressure on our government to get WNBA basketball star Brittney Griner out of Russia. She is currently on trial in Russia.

The Queens Jewish Link has a new feature, “Where’s Warren’s Column?” A couple of months ago under my byline, the paper printed a repeat of Goldy Krantz’s column. This past week the table of contents listed my column on page 46. Instead of my submission, there was a letter to the editor from one of my regular critics. Who knows where my column could end up in a future issue or what will be put in place of it? If anyone has any creative ideas, they should contact the paper.