Posted on 05/20/2005 9:38:16 PM PDT by Libloather
Judge May Dismiss Charge Against Ex-Aide to Clinton
LOS ANGELES, May 20 - In a blow to federal prosecutors, a judge said on Friday that he would probably toss out one of three criminal charges against Hillary Rodham Clinton's former chief fund-raiser, David F. Rosen.
The comments by the judge, A. Howard Matz, came in the course of a day that also featured testimony from two men who are stars in their individual firmaments: Stan Lee, a co-creator of Spider-Man, and Harold Ickes, the longtime adviser to former President Bill Clinton and former deputy chief of staff at the White House.
Both men were called by lawyers for Mr. Rosen, who faces three counts of causing false filings to be made to the Federal Election Commission; each count could bring him five years in prison. The government has accused him of vastly underreporting the expenses of a Hollywood fund-raiser in August 2000, in the hopes of aiding Mrs. Clinton's Senate campaign or his own career.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Hillary corruption bump...
Fix is in.
Question
Why are we stuck with the Michael Jackson trial ?
And why can't we get this trial on TV instead ??
Oh well, that is life in the these united states, under the W.
So, I wonder why going duck-hunting in a group with Dick Cheney was sufficient for cries of favoritism against Scalia in the Energy Task Force matter but actually being appointed by the husband of one of the principal players (although admittedly not the target) of this matter isn't grounds for recusal?
Sounds like the judge has his work cut out to make certain the jury understands the law.
Wow, now THERE'S that "independent judiciary" Ted the swimmer keeps referring to!!
What a load of BS.
Please stop inciting violence against the judiciary. Inflammatory rhetoric is NOT allowed!
LOL
Where there is sleaze, there is Ickes. Where there is Ickes, there is the heinous one.
Yep!
Seen it too many times,
The rich or powerful WALK!
ping
Going to the matz for Hillary.
You're not saying you ever expected anything different, are you?
But the judge was receptive to the defense contention that one count should be dropped because the government did not prove that Mr. Rosen had anything to do with the election-commission filing involved. In dealing with such motions, a judge must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, Judge Matz said, "but that requires that there be evidence, not ether."The Prosecution needs to provide the evidence or not be disgruntled if the judge drops the charge involved.Unless prosecutors come up with better arguments than the ones they presented in the courtroom, he said, "I'm likely to grant the motion."
Sadly, no.
Thanks for the ping!
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.