Posted on 06/28/2013 9:11:39 AM PDT by IChing
Just before the break, the prosecution objected to a question asked of the witness by the defense. The judge overruled, but also told them it was the wrong objection, signaling to them to try another! Can she even do this, legally? They did try another, but it wasn't the one she was looking for.
It’s a kangaroo court and a guilty verdict was already reached a year ago.
I’ve been watching from opening statements, she’s definitely given the defense a hard time of it all along.
Yes, next they will charge him with federal violations of the Melanin Supremacy Act, for having a European last name and for trying to do something about the plague of crime done by young blacks in his neighborhood.
They already did. And got at least a million, to my knowledge.
I didnt know the prosecution could appeal a not-guilty verdict.
One honest juror can spoil their party, pending retrial of course. Failing that, defense can appeal.
They can’t.
You’re right about that. In my first jury trial in federal court before a much-feared judge, I was surprised that he sustained almost all of my objections.
I thought this stuff was easy, and that I am like Perry Mason.
Then, I lost the case, big time; my client had to pay attorney’s fees, too.
When I got the trial transcript back to prepare an appeal, I found I had no decent basis because, in part, the judge had sustained my objections.
I spoke one on one with the judge years later, and although he didn’t recall the trial, he said he does it all the time when he is pretty certain of the outcome from the get go.
As to whether a judge can tell an attorney what might be a legal question, the answer is “yes.”
Anyway, from what I have seen, the judge is being fair to both sides. But, I could stand corrected on that as I have not watched too much.
Most judges, especially experienced trial judges, are pretty damn smart.
“You’re out of order! You’re out of order! The whole trial is out of order! They’re out of order!”
Another classic line by Pacino from AJFA.
Thanks for the information.
I’m pretty sure judges have a lot of latitude on this
I’m not a lawyer , but I know enough to see the prosecution is completely inept here ... Judges are expected to give pro-se defendants a little leeway at least in civil ,, professionals should be left to their own abilities. The Governor has his men there cheerleading and fighting to influence the judge... probably a factor here.
That said the question was “can they do that” ,, the answer MUST BE ... YES ,, because that is what we are observing... a better question is .. Does this give grounds for a mistrial or a sanction of some kind? and ... Did the defense object?
Yep. Judges can even make rulings on questions and answers even when not asked to by an objecting attorney.
I’ve seen it done.
I would love the defense attorney to say “Your Honor, if you want to advise the Prosecution, why not just tell them what objection you’d like them to raise?”
That or “Objection your Honor, the Judge is acting as counsel to the defense.”
O’Mara and West have been patient saints
Eventually grownups get tired of disrespectful tantrum throwing children and do something about it.
I would love the defense attorney to say “Your Honor, if you want to advise the Prosecution, why not just tell them what objection you’d like them to raise?”
I don’t think the state can appeal an innocent verdict.
Double jeopardy and all.
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.