Posted on 03/03/2024 4:58:06 AM PST by CFW
The government gets to select the evidence it will present. It has a duty to disclose exonerating evidence to the defense.
“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial”
Amendment VI
God calls DJT the same thing He called Nebuchadnezzar - “My servant”.
The government may have 37 pieces of evidence.
It may choose to reduce the charges down to 1 and only produce 1 document that was ‘sensitive’ at the time of the alleged ‘crime’ but no longer is.
Only exonerating evidence has to be turned over to the defense.
Of course Trump should have read at least part of each of those 37 that others at the times of handing them to him thought he should read.
If Trump was demanding a speedy trial, then he might have a right to see all 37 again.
Jack Smith is a thug with a law license.
WIKI
The Supreme Court held that withholding exculpatory evidence violates due process “where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment.” The Court determined that under Maryland law, the withheld evidence could not have exculpated the defendant but was material to his level of punishment. Thus, the Maryland Court of Appeals’ ruling was affirmed – Brady would receive a new sentencing hearing but not a new trial.
William O. Douglas wrote: “We now hold that the suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment... Society wins not only when the guilty are convicted, but when criminal trials are fair.”
Exculpatory evidence is “material” if “there is a reasonable probability that his conviction or sentence would have been different had these materials been disclosed.” Brady evidence includes statements of witnesses or physical evidence that conflicts with the prosecution’s witnesses and evidence that could allow the defense to impeach the credibility of a prosecution witness.
In United States v. Bagley (1985), the Court narrowed the reach of Brady by stating the suppressed evidence had to be “exculpatory” and “material” for a violation to result in the reversal of a conviction. Harry Blackmun wrote in Bagley that “only if there is a reasonable probability that, had the evidence been disclosed to the defense, the result of the proceeding would have been different. A ‘reasonable probability’ is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_v._Maryland
“It’s a good thing there are no Republican DAs and judges in red states willing to engage in Lawfare. One side is enough. Besides, severe conservatives don’t behave like that.”
Nonsense, it would stop lawfare immediately if the spineless Republicans responded whole heartily. But constantly turning your cheek while the other guy is pounding the life out of you is not good politics.
Republicans allowed the impeachments without a fight, Massive Voter Fraud, the Mueller investigation, FBI/CIA/DOJ to spy on Trump’s campaign and try to destroy, now they are allowing this lawfare. When has Garland faced any scrutiny lately?
Severe conservatives should believe in the rule of law and a blind justice system.
CFATS Lapse Impacts
Impacts to our nation’s chemical security, the 3,200 facilities previously designated as high-risk, and the communities surrounding these locations—including the 7,000 schools, colleges, and universities located within a mile of these chemical facilities—as a result of the lapse include:
CISA cannot inspect high-risk sites—on average, that’s 160 inspections per month going unscheduled.
CISA cannot conduct terrorist vetting on personnel who have access to dangerous chemicals—that’s 9,000 names each month going unvetted.
More than one third of inspections turn up security gaps—CISA can no longer address these gaps with facilities.
Under CFATS, a chemical facility is any establishment or individual that possesses or plans to possess any of the more than 300 chemicals of interest (COI) in Appendix A at or above the listed screening threshold quantity (STQ) and concentration. These facilities must report their chemicals to CISA via an online survey, known as a Top-Screen. CISA uses the Top-Screen information a facility submits to determine if the facility is considered high-risk and must develop a security plan.
https://www.cisa.gov/resources-tools/programs/chemical-facility-anti-terrorism-standards-cfats
WIKI
From 1912 to 1914 the female enfranchisement movement, the suffragettes, orchestrated a bombing and arson campaign which was described by the suffragettes themselves as terrorism. Emmeline Pankhurst said the suffragettes commited these acts to “terrorise the British public” and the Women’s Social and Political Union reported their own acts as a “Reign of terror”. The campaign included burning down the houses of members of the cabinet, an axe being thrown at the Prime minister, attempted bombings of train stations including with nail bombs, and attempts to flood towns by attacking water courses. Bearman asserts that there were at least 337 arson or bombing attempts and that the cost of the campaign in 2021 money amounted to 140-240 million pounds. 1300 people had been arrested and imprisoned by the end of the campaign.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_Great_Britain
But not a duly appointed and confirmed officer of the United States. All of his actions will be void at some point.
“This is a chronology of activities by the Continuity Irish Republican Army (CIRA), an Irish republican paramilitary group. The group started operations in 1994, after the Provisional Irish Republican Army began a ceasefire.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Continuity_IRA_actions
WIKI
The Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU) was a women-only political movement and leading militant organisation campaigning for women’s suffrage in the United Kingdom founded in 1903. Known from 1906 as the suffragettes, its membership and policies were tightly controlled by Emmeline Pankhurst and her daughters Christabel and Sylvia. Sylvia was eventually expelled.
The WSPU membership became known for civil disobedience and direct action. Emmeline Pankhurst described them as engaging in a “reign of terror”. Group members heckled politicians, held demonstrations and marches, broke the law to force arrests, broke windows in prominent buildings, set fire to or introduced chemicals into postboxes thus injuring several postal workers, and committed a series of arsons that killed at least five people and injured at least 24. When imprisoned, the group’s members engaged in hunger strikes and were subject to force-feeding. Emmeline Pankhurst said the group’s goal was “to make England and every department of English life insecure and unsafe”.
On 13 October 1908, Emmeline Pankhurst together with Christabel Pankhurst and Flora Drummond organised a rush on the House of Commons. 60,000 people gathered in Parliament Square and attempts were made by suffragettes to break through the 5000 strong police cordon. Thirty-seven arrests were made, ten people were taken to hospital. On 29 June 1909, WSPU activists Ada Wright and Sarah Carwin were arrested for breaking government windows. They were sentenced to a month in prison. After breaking every window in their cells, in a protest they went on a hunger strike, following the pioneering strike of Marion Wallace Dunlop. They were released after six days.
The WSPU responded by organising a new and broader campaign of direct action. Once this got underway with the wholesale smashing of shop windows, the government ordered arrests of the leadership. Although they had disagreed with strategy, Frederick and Emmeline Pethwick-Lawrence, were sentenced to nine months imprisonment for conspiracy and successfully sued for the cost of the property damage.
Some WSPU militants, however, were prepared to go beyond outrages against property. On 18 July 1912, in Dublin Mary Leigh threw a hatchet that narrowly missed the head of the visiting prime minister H. H. Asquith. On 29 January 1913, several letter bombs were sent to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, David Lloyd George, and the prime minister Asquith, but they all exploded in post offices, post boxes or in mailbags while in transit across the country. Between February and March 1913, railway signal wires were purposely cut on lines across the country endangering train journeys.
On 19 February 1913, as part of a wider suffragette bombing and arson campaign, a bomb was set off in Pinfold Manor, the country home of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lloyd George, which brought down ceilings and cracked walls. On the evening of the incident Emmeline Pankhurst claimed responsibility, announcing at a public meeting in Cardiff, we have “blown up the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s house”. Pankhurst was willing to be arrested for the incident saying “I have advised, I have incited, I have conspired”; and that if she was arrested for the incident she would prove that the “punishment unjustly imposed upon women who have no voice in making the laws cannot be carried out”. On 3 April Pankhurst was sentenced to three years’ penal servitude for procuring and inciting women to commit “malicious injuries to property”. The Temporary Discharge for Ill Health Bill was rushed through Parliament to ensure that Pankhurst, who had immediately gone on hunger strike, did not die in prison.
In response to the bomb Lloyd George wrote an article in Nash’s Magazine, entitled “Votes for Women and Organised Lunacy” where he argued that the “main obstacle to women getting the vote is militancy”. It had alienated those who would have supported them. The only way for women to get the vote is a new movement “absolutely divorced from stones and bombs and torches”.
On the evening of 9 March 1914 in Glasgow, about 40 militant suffragettes, including members of the Bodyguard team, brawled with several squads of police constables who were attempting to re-arrest Emmeline Pankhurst during a pro-suffrage rally at St. Andrew’s Hall. The following day, suffragette Mary Richardson (known as one of the most militant activists, also called “Slasher” Richardson) walked into the National Gallery in London and attacked Diego Velázquez’s painting, Rokeby Venus with a meat cleaver. Her action stimulated a wave of attacks on artworks that would continue for five months. In June, militants had placed a bomb beneath the Coronation Chair in Westminster Abbey.
Suffragette Annie Kenney recalls an elderly man continuously jeering “if you were my wife I’d give you poison” throughout the course of her speech, to which she replied “yes, and if I were your wife I’d take it,” diffusing threats and making her antagonist appear laughable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_Social_and_Political_Union
Cannon needs to dismiss this case.
If they sent a bunch of redacted crap, Judge Aileen Cannon can’t simply excluded from her court room. It’s complete Soviet bullshit that she’s running a trial, and that the prosecutors get to go to some other judge in DC to make rulings about what evidence she can see. Wade, there are no classified documents. Not a single one. There is no charge involving classified documents. There is a charge regarding “national defense information”. That’s a term of art and why they are charging him under Woodrow Wilson’s espionage act. If you live near an Air Force Base and tell your foreign friend you saw a squadron of F-35s take off today, one after the other, you just transmitted national defense information. It’s that broad of a law.
And Jack smith is essentially a European. He has lived and worked in holland for years.
Except I kind of like the idea of her keeping the case alive, and waiting until well after the convention to dismiss it. She just refused that early July trial date just before the Republican convention. Set another date in late September. Kneel on the ball, run out the clock. If she dismisses it, the pricks will just file a new one in DC. I think that’s what she’s doing.
Jack Smith is asking DC Judge James Boasberg to decide what evidence should be given.
Proof that everybody going after Trump are on the democrats leash rigging in high speed motion.
“Cannon needs to dismiss this case.”
I agree. If neither the judge nor the defense can see the evidence against Trump then the judge should just issue a ruling in favor of Trump.
I want the prosecution to spend months and months — and millions of taxpayer dollars — making asses out of themselves first.
Thanks
This isn’t hard, If Smith doesn’t turn everything over. The Judge in Florida should Dismiss with Prejudice, Sanction Smith the maximum monetary value allowed, Jail him for 90 days, refer him for Disbarment and Criminal Prosecution for Fraud Upon the Court as well as the Deliberate Brady Violations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.