Posted on 12/30/2017 5:35:59 AM PST by Nextrush
3300 pages of evidence withheld, much of it exculpatory toward the defendants.
An insane argument coming from Steve Myhre in Las Vegas.
bookmark
Nevada
Thanks for the head’s up.
Isn’t this “double jeopardy”, retrying the defendants on the same charges using essentially the same evidence?
Exculpation is evidently not considered. Harry Reid’s heavy hand still rests of the scales of justice.
The Prosecutors should be going to jail.
“Isn’t this “double jeopardy”...”
No, as the trials have ended in hung juries.
No guilty verdict.
No innocent verdict.
I feel for these fine folks...
That is the most likely scenario. Judge Navarro was fully participating in the entire charade until the fraud was outed. Then she started making a few better decisions. More and more evidence of Prosecurial Misconduct(withholding Brady evidence) came out. Judge Navarro can no longer cover for the Prosecutor. Both are caught and either way they will take a major hit. Sessions is involved now after being a full cheerleader for the Prosecution. Credibility is shot. Dismiss charges and pay off all the parties that were illegally prosecuted. Oh, and the guy they shot dead just because they could.
Keep trying them until they accept a plea deal? The trials are the punishmet. Offical oppression like the British colonial goverment flisted on our ancestors before 1775. The 6th Amendment is long dead.
The first time of "oversight" of exculpatory evidence might be considered accidental, although,that is unlikely and demonstrates professional incompetence.
The second incidence of "oversight" is obviously intentional and demonstrates collusion, with 'malicious intent'.
The third incidence of "oversight" is a malignant conspiratorial effort and should be criminally prosecuted by the court and further, by the bar association.
In this case, in my opinion, the DOJ lawyers are clearly lying. I suspect the judge knows that, too.
Discovery is a problem. If the defense didn’t request it, there is no reason to give it. And you can’t always tell what you are going to use until you decide to use it in trial. It’s always a struggle to determine what does and what does not need to be disclosed. There are attorney work product issues also. It’s not all black and white. Working in the gray areas is what makes legal work difficult.
My comments apply to all cases, not just Bundy’s. My problem in the Bundy case is that I have not been able to figure out what Bundys are being prosecuted for. Which brings up another problem—overzealous prosecution with no regard for the truth. I don’t do criminal defense, but I am around it. I see and hear about so much overcharging, wanting convictions to build a record to support a judicial appointment for the prosecutor later, it just makes me sick.
Not when there is a mistrial unless case is dismissed “with prejudice.” Has the court made that determination yet?
This is all about the government wanting control of the Bundy’s property. The Bundy’s were the only ranchers who stood in the way and would NOT sell and resisted. One way or another via multiple trials, intended to “break” the financial bank of the Bundy’s, the government will get/take control of that land. I could be way off base but that’s my take on this travesty of justice.
Reminds me of a book entitled, “The Trial” by Franz Kafka.
Sessions won't because he's a fag.
Horsecrap. The defense asked for specific documents and media, and the defense explicitly told them it didn’t exist. That is not ‘inadvertant’, that is prosecutorial misconduct due to obvious perjury. And grounds for terminating sanctions with referral to BAR to strip prosecutor of attorney license and immunity from civil suit(s).
I wonder if Jeff has replaced any of Obama’s US Attorneys yet? Clinton fired all of Bush’s pretty much on day one. But then Jeff is still carrying Rosenfeinstein.
Has the court made that determination yet?
______________________
Judge is deliberating whether with prejudice or not this weekend. Motion made by defense last week. Feds sent ‘evidence expert’ from DOJ to whisper in judge’s ear last week.
Given that specific questions were answered falsely by the prosecution multiple times, this case should be dismissed w/ prejudice (no further prosecution possible).
Hear! Hear!
Tilted Irish Kilt nailed it!
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.