Rosemary Lehmberg, The Drunk-Driving DA Of Travis County
Posted on 01/31/2015 3:14:50 PM PST by SSS Two
Edited on 01/31/2015 7:43:37 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
AUSTIN – Former Gov. Rick Perry again Friday asked a state judge to toss out the indictment accusing him of abusing his authority.
Perry’s lawyers said the charges against the former governor were too vague and failed to allege a violation of the law.
The argument follows a roadmap for another attempt to toss the indictment that was outlined by Judge Bert Richardson on Tuesday when he denied a previous motion to dismiss ...
In Friday’s filing, Perry’s lawyers said both counts against the former governor were too vague and failed to allege a violation of the law.
Among other points, Perry’s lawyers said the second count failed to “allege the language of the alleged threat so as to reflect that it was a ‘true’ threat, which is required by the fee speech provisions of the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Texas.”
Perry’s team has taken issue with the idea that Perry actually made a threat.
Richardson in his earlier ruling said the prosecution must amend its filing to meet a concern over wording raised by Perry's lawyers regarding the indictment’s second count. He also invited McCrum to amend the first count to include more specifics.
(Excerpt) Read more at mysanantonio.com ...
I like how Perry's lawyers claim that the indictment doesn't even allege what the purported "threat" was. Judge Richardson will undoubtedly allow the prosecution to amend the indictment to identify what the so-called threat was.
Ultimately, it looks like Judge Richardson wants to find that the indictment doesn't allege that former Governor Perry committed a crime even if everything it says is true. For Count 1, former Gov. Perry did not enter into an agreement on not to veto a spending bill. He didn't violate his oath do office by vetoing the bill either. For Count 2, any alleged "threat" was protected as part of the former governor's deliberative process on how to act upon the spending bill.
Sorry for the unrelated text at the top of the article.
Moderator will fix it if you request
Rosemary Lehmberg, The Drunk-Driving DA Of Travis County
Oh yuk! I sure hope this hideous creature is not reproducing more of her kind.
After eleven years, the matter of Mr. DeLay’s fund-raising in the 2002 election cycle has been finally put to rest, with Mr. Earle’s case having been vivisected by Justice Melissa Goodwin, who in her quietly scathing opinion did not bother even to consider six of the eight points raised by Mr. DeLay’s defense, finding the first two sufficient to snuff out what is in theory a prosecution but is in fact a persecution.
DeLay’s Vindication, Texas’s Shame
(September 20, 2013)
Hoosiermama - Thanks for the advice!
How does what Perry did differ from what Obama has been threatening since the Republicans took over, “I will veto it”
about five times already?
Knowing that pictures like that will be posted always make me ask myself if a article related to Lehmberg in any way is absolutely necessary.
Not much. The big difference is the existence of an ideologically driven prosecutor pursuing an untenable legal case against Perry. There is no ideologically driven prosecutor willing to pursue a no-win case against Pres. Obama.
The short answer is Obama’s prosecutor is his best friend who would never lift a finger to target him.
Perry’s prosecutrix is a rabid evil demonrat - went after Tom Delay also.
Try clicking on the “abuse” button and ask.
That gets their attention
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.