I don't know -- however, I also don't have any information against which to compare the matter. Transcripts are the responsibility of the trial judge. Although I don't know how it works in federal courts, in many state and municipal courts, people who want transcripts have to pay a fee to get them.
If it's true that the transcripts are not available yet, is this a norm for that court? That judge? Is it at all unusual? Was there a problem with the court reporter? Illness, perhaps? Has the judge ordered them sealed? If yes, why?
You see, I at least would try to understand the entire set of facts before jumping to a conclusion that there is only a nefarious explanation. And I do my own thinking. I don't let talk radio, internet blogs, or people on forums such as this do my thinking for me.
You didnt say if you knew who Sanchez is?
Sorry Wolfstar but you are late to this game and you didn't do your homework or "understand the entire set of facts before you jumped to the conclusion that our Congressmen were jumping off a bridge on this one.
Yes, it is very unusual for the trial transcripts not to be available a year later. No, the court reporter has no known illness. Yes, something was sealed. It was the record of the illegal that was shot at. The jury members have come out an said they were led to believe they had to have a unanimous vote, no hung jury allowed. Lots of shady things went on in this trial which makes an appeal with a good outcome suspicious too. That chance is better since Hunter, Rohrbacher, Poe, and Tancredo have gotten light on this.