Posted on 12/05/2005 1:38:06 PM PST by John Jorsett
The correct answer, which the lamestream media has finally recognized from prior Court experience in this exact issue, is this: if O'Connor's vote does not affect the outcome, her vote is discarded and the decision is announced.
But, if her vote would affect the income, the decision is withdrawn and the case is reargued, with the new Justice now seated and participating.
Same situation here. Napalitano doesn't even have it right that there is an outstanding motion to dismiss the money-laundering charge for misconduct by Ronnie Earle. And after that will be another motion to dismiss the charge during the trial. And a motion to drop deLay from the case as a defendant.
This charge is harder to prove, and likely is going nowhere. Judge Napolitano is behind the legal curve. Again.
John / Billybob
Thank you very much for the clarification. I take the Judge with a grain of salt already, this just reinforces it.
You are just a sucker if you beleive that.
I cannot WAIT for that DuFu edition!
If you think Judge Napolitano is bad you should see how AP spun this. Boy, they don't even try to hide their bias anymore.
Can anyone find a link to the decision on line?
Ah! that's good news.
Thank you.
LMAO! Beat me to it KCB! I was thinking the same.
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay said yesterday that Republicans have done so well in cutting spending that he declared an "ongoing victory," and said there is simply no fat left to cut in the federal budget. Mr. DeLay was defending Republicans' choice to borrow money and add to this year's expected $331 billion deficit to pay for Hurricane Katrina relief. Some Republicans have said Congress should make cuts in other areas, but Mr. DeLay said that doesn't seem possible. "My answer to those that want to offset the spending is sure, bring me the offsets, I'll be glad to do it. But nobody has been able to come up with any yet," the Texas Republican told reporters at his weekly briefing. Asked if that meant the government was running at peak efficiency, Mr. DeLay said, "Yes, after 11 years of Republican majority we've pared it down pretty good."
Here is the AP take....boy are they biased!
DeLay's Money Laundering Charges Upheld
A judge dismissed a conspiracy charge Monday against Rep. Tom DeLay but refused to throw out the far more serious allegations of money-laundering, dashing the congressman's hopes for now of reclaiming his post as House majority leader.
----snip----
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/12/05/national/w140324S34.DTL
Probably so; wonder if Earle is in a panic now.
With balogna during grand jury indictments....at which time, the grand jury only gets to hear the prosecutor's "evidence." The accused cannot be there, nor is attorney; there are no "two sides" present, and a bad prosecutor can paint a bad picture with a broad sweep of his dirty brush. And the standard to indict is lower than to convict at trial (bench or jury).
I hope Earle gets a spanking from the Judge.
Just turned it on....unfortunately, I missed it! : (
True.
From NRO:
JUST IN FROM DELAY'S OFFICE [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
Congressman Tom DeLay
Representing the 22nd District of Texas
For Immediate Release Contact: Kevin Madden
December 5, 2005 Phone: (202) 225-5951
Statement from the Office of Congressman Tom DeLay
WASHINGTON - Kevin Madden, spokesman for Congressman Tom DeLay (R-Texas) today released the following statement in response to Texas Senior Judge Judge Pat Priest's ruling:
"The court's decision to dismiss a portion of Ronnie Earle's manufactured and flawed case against Mr. DeLay underscores just how baseless and politically motivated the charges were.
"The judge's ruling, along with the recusal motion previously granted, represents yet another legal victory.
"Mr. DeLay is very encouraged by the swift progress of the legal proceedings and looks forward to his eventual and absolute exoneration based on the facts and the law."
###
Fast Facts About Today's Ruling:
First indictment was quashed.
The judge notes in his letter that a motion to dismiss based on prosecutorial misconduct is still pending for the second indictment (also known as the "Do-Over Indictment") and will require the hearing of evidence. The bulk of the arguments made in that motion concerned the manner in which Ronnie Earle went about getting this second indictment. Thus, the pending indictment can still yet be dismissed after additional hearings.
From today's ruling:
[1] At least one motion to dismiss upon the basis of alleged prosecutorial misconduct was filed by Defendant DeLay and is presumed by the Court to have been adopted by defendants Colyandro and Ellis. This motion may require the hearing of evidence (a matter not yet resolved), and it is not included within the ambit of the present rulings.
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.