To: dynachrome
And if Sutton knew they were lies at the time he testified, but didn’t inform the Court, what then of Sutton?
Disbarment hearings? Contempt of Court? Tell his mommy on him?
4 posted on
12/03/2007 4:08:03 PM PST by
savedbygrace
(SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
To: savedbygrace
And if Sutton knew they were lies at the time he testified... We've already been through this - do you remember that piece of slime named Mike Nifong? Nothing substantial will be done. The two agents have been in prison for what? Over a year I think? If they disbar Sutton that will be considered "good enough"...
7 posted on
12/03/2007 4:13:01 PM PST by
Friend_from_the_Frozen_North
(If you are, as Rush would say, "A Glittering Jewel of Colossal Ignorance" don't waste my time...)
To: savedbygrace
And if Sutton knew they were lies at the time he testified, but didn’t inform the Court, what then of Sutton?Depending on the state ethics rules and applicable laws, he should (IMHO) face sanction, disbarment, and possibly criminal charges. I'm sure that Compton's and Ramos's defense attorneys will look into and pursue this...
17 posted on
12/03/2007 4:20:58 PM PST by
piytar
To: savedbygrace
And if Sutton knew they were lies at the time he testified, but didn’t inform the Court, what then of Sutton?
sounds similar to the Nifong case re: Duke lacrosse. Clearly this was an abuse of power abd Sutton must be made accountable. Under the color of authority Sutton has committed serious criminal acts.
To: savedbygrace
And if Sutton knew they were lies at the time he testified, but didn’t inform the Court, what then of Sutton? The only place Sutton testified was before a Senate hearing. The case was prosecuted by two of his minions, AUSAs Debra Kanof and Jose Luis Gonzalez. The latter two definitely knew that OAD lied--in fact, they helped it along in opening and closing arguments.
57 posted on
12/03/2007 5:41:58 PM PST by
calcowgirl
("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
To: savedbygrace
if Sutton knew they were lies at the time he testified, but didn’t inform the Court Dereliction of duty as an Officer of the Court. He May be brought before the Bar and punished according to the rules of the Bar.
118 posted on
12/03/2007 9:41:42 PM PST by
Navy Patriot
(The hyphen American with the loudest whine gets the grease.)
To: savedbygrace
Tell his mommy on him?
Given the way the administration has reacted to the case thus far, it's very likely that's the only punishment Suton will receive. Ugh.
126 posted on
12/04/2007 6:11:10 AM PST by
Xenalyte
(Can you count, suckas? I say the future is ours . . . if you can count.)
To: savedbygrace
Sutton oughta have his azz in the slammer over this one. It is abuse of the Judicial power. It makes a mockery of the courts.
This kinda crap just reveals that the courts are truly just a good ‘ol boy network.
163 posted on
12/04/2007 7:20:41 PM PST by
djf
(Send Fred some bread! Not a whole loaf, a slice or two will do!)
To: savedbygrace
And if Sutton knew they were lies at the time he testified, but didn’t inform the Court, what then of Sutton? He would be be another Mike Nifong, deserving of disbarment at a minimum, and possibly even an indictment.
253 posted on
12/10/2007 1:04:26 PM PST by
jpl
(Dear Al Gore: it's 3:00 A.M., do you know where your drug addicted son is?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson