Current Maximum Sustained Winds 150 MPH - Cat 4. Projection Models show South Florida a direct hit this Saturday.
Posted on 10/18/2005 11:49:49 PM PDT by flattorney
AUSTIN - U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay's chief lawyer says he has no evidence that Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle participated in grand jury deliberations, despite having made that allegation in motions to dismiss DeLay's indictments. But Houston attorney Dick DeGuerin said there have been enough public comments by grand jurors in news media reports to raise suspicions that Earle may have violated laws in his efforts to indict one of the most powerful Republican politicians in the nation.
DeGuerin is seeking access to grand jury records to develop possible evidence of misconduct on Earle's part. He has subpoenaed records from two of his assistant district attorneys related to their dealings with three grand juries that investigated DeLay.
Members of a grand jury that no-billed DeLay have told reporters that Earle was angry with them. DeGuerin also has focused on media reports that Earle's office telephoned former members of the first grand jury to indict DeLay, asking them if they might have returned other charges, and then presented the results of the poll to a third grand jury, which issued new indictments.
Seeking dismissal - - DeGuerin is asking a judge to allow him to question members of the grand juries. A prosecutor being present when a grand jury was deliberating or voting on an indictment is specific grounds under Texas law for an indictment to be dismissed. Lawyers for Jim Ellis, who was indicted along with DeLay on money-laundering and conspiracy charges, filed a similar motion to dismiss Tuesday, accusing Earle's office of "outrageous government conduct."
Earle has said he expects to prevail on the motions. He cited grand jury secrecy in refusing to comment further. A hearing on the motion to dismiss could come as early as Friday, when DeLay makes his first appearance in court.
The combination of a high-profile defendant and grand jurors who are talking about their experience has cast a spotlight on the process. Secrecy is a long-standing hallmark of grand jury proceedings. It is designed to protect innocent people under investigation as well as prevent those being investigated from fleeing or trying to bribe grand jurors or witnesses.
Legal experts on grand juries say it's unlikely that the defense team will be given access to the records or that DeLay will be able to prove anything serious enough to get his charges thrown out. "It seems an uphill battle to get access to grand jury material based upon things reporters have written in a newspaper," said Samuel Buell, a former federal prosecutor who now teachers criminal law at the University of Texas School of Law. Buell, who served as lead prosecutor in the case against Enron's former top executives, said the defense would have to show a "real serious claim of misconduct" to persuade a judge to allow questioning of Earle and grand jurors.
DeGuerin wants to find out what happened during the five days after DeLay was first indicted Sept. 28 on a charge of conspiracy to violate a ban on corporate contributions to Texas candidates. Questions have been raised, however, about whether such a conspiracy charge applied to election-law violations in 2002 when the campaign transactions occurred.
New evidence cited - - In an Oct. 4 news release, Earle acknowledged that "issues have arisen regarding that indictment which will be argued in court and resolved by a judge." He said that "out of an abundance of caution," before the statute of limitations was running out, his office presented "some evidence of those allegations" to another grand jury, which voted to no-bill Sept. 30. "Additional information came to the attention of the District Attorney's Office over the weekend, however, and that evidence was presented to the next Travis County grand jury on Monday (Oct. 3)," the release continued.
That grand jury returned two indictments, charging DeLay with money laundering and conspiracy to launder money. There's no law against a prosecutor presenting a case to more than one grand jury. Buell said if Earle did poll former grand jurors, it would be "very unusual." And he said Earle would have needed to present other evidence to the new grand jury.
"In order to return an indictment, a grand jury needs to make its own independent determination of whether there's sufficient evidence," said Buell. "There's nothing wrong with presenting one grand jury with evidence that has been gathered by another grand jury. But one grand jury's conclusion should not control the legal conclusion of another grand jury."
#snip#
Earle is TOAST!
Yep and the Houston Chronic is bird cage liner.
He's got a MoveOn.org judge... they could stretch this out without ever going to trial.
It's the old "It's not my fault defense"
about as much evidence as earle had. what's good for the hammer is good for the the prosecuter.
about as much evidence as earle had. what's good for the hammer is good for the the prosecuter.
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.