Posted on 10/04/2005 12:16:19 PM PDT by anymouse
A new Travis County grand jury hurriedly reindicted U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay on a charge of conspiring to violate state election laws and added two charges related to money laundering Monday after DeLay's lawyers challenged the validity of an indictment returned last week.
Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle's office described the reindictment as procedural, but DeLay attorney Dick DeGuerin portrayed it as an effort to correct what he described as an embarrassingly flawed indictment against the Sugar Land Republican.
"Apparently, no one cracked a book before they issued that first indictment," DeGuerin said. "This is a mess. This looks like Keystone Kops."
DeLay was forced to step down as U.S. House majority leader after he was indicted on a conspiracy charge returned by a grand jury that had spent six months hearing testimony in an investigation led by Earle.
It was the third grand jury to hear the case.
Earle's office took the case back to a new grand jury that was impaneled at about noon Monday to reindict DeLay and add the money-laundering charges.
Two DeLay associates — John Colyandro and Jim Ellis — also were reindicted on conspiracy and money-laundering charges.
Colyandro and Ellis had been indicted on a money-laundering charge last year.
Earle offered little comment or explanation of the new indictments, and refused to take calls from the Houston Chronicle.
"This indictment consolidates previous charges against John Colyandro and Jim Ellis ... and adds Congressman DeLay as a party defendant to money laundering," said a statement issued by Earle's office.
Money laundering is a first degree felony punishable by five years' probation to life in prison, with a fine of up to $10,000.
Conspiracy to commit money laundering is a second degree felony punishable by two years' probation to 20 years in prison with a fine of up to $10,000.
DeGuerin said the new indictment was returned after he filed a motion to dismiss the original indictment against DeLay. The original indictment alleged DeLay was involved in a conspiracy to violate state election laws in a scheme to convert corporate money into cash that was available for 2002 Republican state House candidates.
DeGuerin said the problem with that indictment was state law was not changed to make the conspiracy indictment apply to the state election laws until 2003 — a year after the supposed violation. He said the quick turnaround with a new grand jury showed Earle's case against DeLay was improvised.
"It proves a district attorney can lead a grand jury around like a bull with a ring through its nose," DeGuerin said.
DeLay's statement DeLay issued a statement blasting the indictments. He has said he has done nothing wrong.
"Ronnie Earle has stooped to a new low with his brand of prosecutorial abuse," DeLay's statement said. "He is trying to pull the legal equivalent of a 'do-over' since he knows very well that the charges he brought against me last week were totally manufactured and illegitimate."
The investigation has focused on the activities of the DeLay-founded Texans for a Republican Majority, or TRMPAC. Earle claims the committee, Colyandro and Ellis raised corporate money to influence 2002 legislative races in violation of state law.
The money laundering indictments involved $190,000 in restricted corporate money that was sent to the Republican National State Elections Committee. The national committee returned $190,000 in donations from individuals to seven Texas House candidates.
Two criminal defense and election law experts interviewed by the Chronicle said Earle's original indictment of DeLay is likely to be upheld by the courts.
University of Texas law Professor George Dix said he wasn't sure why a new indictment was necessary because the Penal Code in 2002 made it a crime to conspire to commit any felony.
Dix said it was a felony in 2002 to use corporate money to try to influence the outcome of an election.
He said the fact the law was changed in 2003 to specifically include the election code under conspiracy should be irrelevant. "I don't see the necessity for the 2003 law," he said.
'Belt and suspenders' Austin attorney Buck Wood, who represents losing Democratic candidates in a civil suit against corporations that contributed to TRMPAC, called the new charges a "belt and suspenders indictment. It means you don't take any chances."
Wood agreed with Dix that the conspiracy charge already was covered by the penal code in 2002 but also noted that all nine members of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which would review any convictions, are Republicans.
"With the Court of Criminal Appeals, it is probably not a bad idea to go ahead and have all your bases covered," Wood said.
Chronicle reporter Eric Hanson in Sugar Land contributed to this story.
"Apparently, no one cracked a book before they issued that first indictment," DeGuerin said. "This is a mess. This looks like Keystone Kops."
Earle offered little comment or explanation of the new indictments, and refused to take calls from the Houston Chronicle.
DeGuerin said the new indictment was returned after he filed a motion to dismiss the original indictment against DeLay. The original indictment alleged DeLay was involved in a conspiracy to violate state election laws in a scheme to convert corporate money into cash that was available for 2002 Republican state House candidates.
DeGuerin said the problem with that indictment was state law was not changed to make the conspiracy indictment apply to the state election laws until 2003 — a year after the supposed violation. He said the quick turnaround with a new grand jury showed Earle's case against DeLay was improvised.
"It proves a district attorney can lead a grand jury around like a bull with a ring through its nose," DeGuerin said.
"Ronnie Earle has stooped to a new low with his brand of prosecutorial abuse," DeLay's statement said. "He is trying to pull the legal equivalent of a 'do-over' since he knows very well that the charges he brought against me last week were totally manufactured and illegitimate."
Wood agreed with Dix that the conspiracy charge already was covered by the penal code in 2002 but also noted that all nine members of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which would review any convictions, are Republicans.
The question I have is whether an indictment by a grand jury that did not hear any testimony or see any evidence can be thrown out.
The MSM is about to learn something we Texans have known for years: don't hang the hero mantle on Ronnie Earle. He's like Boss Hogg: he's basically a self-aggrandizing buffoon with a title, and if he weren't as entrenched as a tick in his own county, he'd be in jail himself.
"It was the third grand jury to hear the case."
Sounds like Grand Jury shopping to me. I think that should be added to the list of charges that Earle will face when he loses.
"The Grand jury that couldn't indict straight"
Well...
"There also probably will be a fight over whether the three-year deadline for indicting DeLay has expired.
In a letter to Earle, DeGuerin said DeLay is withdrawing his waiver of the statute of limitations to investigate him. Last month DeLay signed that waiver in an attempt to head off an indictment. The date on the $190,000 check to the committee is Sept. 13, 2002. The committee checks cut to candidates were dated Oct. 4, 2002."
Source: The Austin American Statesman.
When the Republicans were going to change their rule about a leader having to step down if indicted and the Dems raised such a rumpus (though they have no such rule for themselves), I really hoped they'd do something in-your-face like amend the rule to " . . . unless the indictment is brought by Ronnie Earle." ;-)
LOL! The new grand jury was impaneled at noon, and had the indictments ready by the end of the day.
Did they even bother sitting down?
Mr. Delay was also indicted for allegedly failing to keep his peas separate from his mashed potatoes during dinner.
The former majority leader has repeatedly denied charges of mixing his peas into his mashed potatoes in order to eat them with a knife.
Culinary conniving is punishable in Texas with a three-zillion-dollar fine and/or twenty years at hard labor gutting armadillos in Amarillo.
I have been told all of my life that the wheels of justice turn slowly. Apparently that is not always true. In fact, it would seem that a grand jury does not have to waste any time considering the evidence before returning an indictment.
Apparently, the same is true as to the 2nd indictment. Even if every allegation in the indictment is true, those allegations do not fit the crime of 'money laundering' because the original source of the money was not illegal.
"Ham sandwiches" all around, LMAO.
Mark Levin is gonna ruin his day, see breaking newz, woo hoo.
***"It was the third grand jury to hear the case."
Sounds like Grand Jury shopping to me. I think that should be added to the list of charges that Earle will face when he loses.***
IIRC, Seventh GJ to hear the case.
Has DeLay been accused of ripping tags off mattresses?
Or has he been accused of having an upaid parking ticket when he was in college?
Landmark Legal has asked for a FOIR to Earle, his staff, from 2001 - 2005 about any DNC etc. communications, a and phone records from August 2005 - October 2005.
Wonder what they know?
You didn't expect the Comical to actually get the facts right did you? :)
The fact that the Comical isn't calling for DeLay to be drawn and quartered and dipped in boiling oil shows that they are dubious of the legitimacy and sticking power of Earle's case.
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.