lousy reporting. No curiosity as to why the judge made such a ruling. Was the judge just being an idiot or were the statutes written such that the missing charge undermined the others? We don’t know. This simply makes the judge look bad, which may or may not be earned.
I agree that the reporting is lousy, but it is from Reuters.
But every single article on this judicial decision uses the Reuters article as their source.
Will keep looking.
“lousy reporting. No curiosity as to why the judge made such a ruling. Was the judge just being an idiot or were the statutes written such that the missing charge undermined the others? We don’t know. This simply makes the judge look bad, which may or may not be earned.”
Judge decision was based on prosecutors citing negligence in the Grand Jury not gross negligence.
Judge is allowing prosecutors to address this mistake.
The question is why did it take so long to make this decision.