Skip to comments.
Grand Jury Foreman Defends DeLay Indictment (More Impropriety in Travis County Grand Jury)
News 8 Austin ^
| 9/29/2005
| Hermelinda Vargas
Posted on 09/30/2005 7:35:03 PM PDT by anymouse
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-113 next last
Isn't it highly illegal for members of a Grand Jury to talk about their deliberations? If this guy is who he says he is, isn't he admitting that he himself is committing a crime? And a former LEO? Something doesn't smell right here.
1
posted on
09/30/2005 7:35:07 PM PDT
by
anymouse
To: Gracey; DrewsDad; basil; Flyer
2
posted on
09/30/2005 7:36:54 PM PDT
by
anymouse
To: anymouse
Understand he called into KLBJ yesterday to talk. Or was that this morning. Time is flying. Either way for a man that doesn't want his picture taken he sure doesn't mind making the media rounds.
3
posted on
09/30/2005 7:37:03 PM PDT
by
TXBubba
( Democrats: If they don't abort you then they will tax you to death.)
To: anymouse
Isn't it highly illegal for members of a Grand Jury to talk about their deliberations? If this guy is who he says he is, isn't he admitting that he himself is committing a crime? And a former LEO? Something doesn't smell right here.Uh, exactly what has he talked about? All he's said is that he believes the indictment he and the others issued was warranted. Not exactly letting out anything we didn't know there.
To: anymouse
They did indict a ham sandwich:
I had known about the tendency of grand juries to follow the dictates of prosecutors instead of concerning themselves, as they are supposed to do, with protecting the unjustly accused. Still, I was stunned by a statistic presented by Bogira: From 2000 through 2003, Cook County grand juries “approved 1,706 indictments for every indictment they rejected.”
5
posted on
09/30/2005 7:41:59 PM PDT
by
sourcery
(Givernment: The way the average voter spells "government.")
To: anymouse
The phrase "house Majority man" tells me what I am dealing with in Mr. Gibson. We shall see.
Is that Grand Jury disbanded and allowed to discuss the workings of the jury and the facts presented to them?
To: anymouse
Yep. The truth is that Grand Jury does what the prosecution wants. They never act on their own. And as for the indictment - if there's evidence to back it, I haven't seen it. Maybe the foreman knows something the rest of us don't? I'd love to know what that might be.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
7
posted on
09/30/2005 7:46:47 PM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: anymouse
Gibson may have found a horse's head on his front porch this morning.
He's got to justify this, when the truth is, the Grand Jury only hears what Ronnie Earle wants them to hear. There is NO exculpatory evidence favorable to a potential defendant shown to Grand Juries which is, surprise, why they usually hand down indictments.
8
posted on
09/30/2005 7:48:23 PM PDT
by
sinkspur
(Breed every trace of the American Staffordshire Terrier out of existence!)
To: anymouse
From the way they are acting, I expect these 12 morons to come forward and claim that they are not partisan and, as a matter of fact, are the only 12 "republicans" in Travis county. And oh yeah! They all "voted for Bush" and "support the troops." Commie 'RATS. Ya gotta love 'em.
9
posted on
09/30/2005 7:51:15 PM PDT
by
FlingWingFlyer
(We Gave Peace A Chance. It Didn't Work Out. Search keyword: 09-11-01.)
To: anymouse
The evidence is there to prove Delay was involved in wrongdoing and also prove that he and his fellow grand jurors acted independent of political influence, Gibson said.Fair enough Mr Grand Jury foreman, if Mr Delay is guilty then he should be found that way by a jury of his peers. However, if he is found not guilty then you, the rest of your Grand Jury partners, and Mr. Earle have a lot of 'splainin to do?>p>And at this point, I wouldn't want to be in any of your shoes.
To: anymouse
Hey, we need this guy on a Grand Jury in Arkansas don't we? Since he cares so much about the rule of law, maybe He would look into the antics of one Bill Clinton and his charming abettor Hillary Rodham? They sure need several indictments dating back for years
!
11
posted on
09/30/2005 7:54:08 PM PDT
by
ladyinred
(It is all my fault okay?)
To: Texas Songwriter
I was foreman of a Grand Jury for a year.
You cannot discuss the cases period.
The judges here would have locked me up if I or the 23 others talked to the press or anyone!!!!!
We had sensational cases and no one has stepped forward in ten years to discuss the evidence we saw.
To: sinkspur
Yes, exactly. The D.A presents all the evidence. You don't have the right to present your side of the story to a GJ. You have to save that for a trial jury and judge.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
13
posted on
09/30/2005 7:55:31 PM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: TXBubba; Gracey; DrewsDad; basil; Flyer
I heard his "story" this morning on KLBJ. As I posted on another thread, his comments sounded like he was
reading from a script, (probably from the DA) rather than being on live radio. I smell something, and it is
NOT roses.
I smell something that reminds me of a dead fish or Pepe Le Puuugggghhhhh......
14
posted on
09/30/2005 7:55:41 PM PDT
by
Arrowhead1952
(Note to the MSM - Don't stay stuck on STUPID!)
To: goldstategop
Yep. The truth is that Grand Jury does what the prosecution wants. They never act on their own. And as for the indictment - if there's evidence to back it, I haven't seen it. Maybe the foreman knows something the rest of us don't? I'd love to know what that might be.
Reminds me of the old saying..a prosecutor can get a Grand Jury to indict a Ham Sandwich...
15
posted on
09/30/2005 7:56:07 PM PDT
by
rolling_stone
(Question Authority!)
To: anymouse
The evidence is there to prove Delay was involved in wrongdoing and also prove that he and his fellow grand jurors acted independent of political influence, Gibson said. I guess this idiot found out he was gonna be in a movie.
16
posted on
09/30/2005 7:56:31 PM PDT
by
blake6900
(YOUR AD HERE)
To: ConservativeGreek
"We had sensational cases and no one has stepped forward in ten years to discuss the evidence we saw."
OK, now you have to tell us!!!!
17
posted on
09/30/2005 7:59:24 PM PDT
by
frankjr
To: ConservativeGreek
My Dad was on a grand jury for 18 months once and I thought I remember him telling me, as a child, that he could not discuss it, even after the GJ disbanded. Thanks.
To: rolling_stone
19
posted on
09/30/2005 8:00:01 PM PDT
by
Slings and Arrows
(It took 6 grand juries to indict Tom Delay. That's 5 more than it takes to indict a ham sandwich.)
To: Texas Songwriter
News 8 Austin's Hermelinda Vargas, left, interviews William Gibson, who did not want his face shown.
20
posted on
09/30/2005 8:02:19 PM PDT
by
kcvl
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-113 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson