Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Golden Eagle
But the DOJ thinks it does, and they probably have witnesses from government on their side who can attest their opinion of it.

Actually, the first two paragraphs of the article posted above suggest that this is NOT the case.

And keep in mind that this is exactly what makes the case so ludicrous. If the prosecution and prosecution he defense have competing opinions on a point of fact (as opposed to a point of law) in a case, then the jury MUST see the evidence in order to make a factual determination.

52 posted on 03/19/2024 11:55:48 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (If something in government doesn’t make sense, you can be sure it makes dollars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]


To: Alberta's Child
this is exactly what makes the case so ludicrous. If the prosecution and prosecution he defense have competing opinions on a point of fact (as opposed to a point of law) in a case, then the jury MUST see the evidence in order to make a factual determination.

They’re working through this now. I think the public claims of ‘it’s classified’ and “has to do with nuclear sub etc info” were to try to paint a picture that it was pretty much without question national security related. Whether that’s what the information truly is or not, isn’t publicly know, but it doesn’t necessarily require each jury member to make that determination by themselves alone, either. Some jurors may feel that they personally have to see it, butsome may not, and be willing to listen to the professional opinions of witnesses on its nature, only.

55 posted on 03/19/2024 12:09:01 PM PDT by Golden Eagle (It is far easier to fool someone, than to convince them that they've been fooled. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson