By George Kronnisanyon Werner
Legal writing, speaking, and thinking should aim at perfection: precision in language, consistency in facts, and rigor in reasoning. That aspiration reflects law’s deep relationship with logic and philosophy. An allegation must have a clear meaning; an inference must rest on identifiable premises; and a conclusion must be supported by evidence. Where a person’s liberty and reputation are at stake, these disciplines matter profoundly.
Perfection is an aspiration, not a condition every legal document must satisfy to remain valid. But an indictment should present a coherent account of who allegedly did what, when, where, and with what criminal intent. When dates conflict, quantities change, or descriptions of payments differ, those differences deserve scrutiny.
That is the concern raised by my reading of the indictment involving Jewel Howard-Taylor and other defendants in the alleged $317 million cocaine
