Posted on 03/09/2023 12:17:41 PM PST by McGruff
The ex-lawyer for Jacob Chansley, the Navy veteran known widely in the media as the "QAnon Shaman" for his outlandish look during the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, told Fox News' Tucker Carlson he had not seen the newly-released footage that could have aided his client against federal charges.
Watkins said the footage proves Chansley did not have all the evidence to decide whether he should go to trial or take a plea. (He ultimately took a plea.}
"This is about our justice system being so compromised, the very integrity and core of that, which we wore as a badge of honor for the entirety of our nation's history, has been rendered a vile, disgusting mess by a Department of Justice that was running amok," Watkins said. "And they didn't share the video of my client, the footage from my client with nine officers surrounding him peacefully, wandering about, trying to help them, trying to get him access to the Senate chamber. They didn't because it didn't fit their narrative."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
What then?
But this is no longer a just world......
Yeah it is a tragedy alright, what in the HELL are you going to do about it JEEZE!!!
....in a “criminal case”, there is a thing called chain of custody regarding any evidence you might want to present to a court to help your client.
In this case, the court would want to know where the ORIGINAL video is and who took it and whoever took it would have to take the stand and swear to it. After that, the court would want to know every single person who had even come near the video, and so on.
So, I THINK (I’m not a lawyer) Shaman’s lawyer couldn’t admit into evidence what we are now seeing because of evidentiary rules barring him from doing so.
The fact that this has not happened, along with the fact that election challenges clearly cannot be heard in court and other things, tells me this whole damn thing is nothing more than theater. Every bit of it.
It’s time for ‘Law & Order’ conservatives to take a hard look at plea deals.
You lost me, wth are you talking about?
-PJ
Nope.
I am a lawyer and the standard for admissibility of pictorial evidence is: (1) you are the person who took it and testify as to its creation (2) you are the person depicted and testify it “is you” (3) you were there at the time and testify the pic/video accurately rep’s what happened (4) no-one objects and its intro’d by stipulation [99% are this way as no-one seriously disputes pics/video].
Alternate method is to intro it as a “business record” - which would also apply in this case. The ‘custodian’ of records comes in and testifies [usually through a written declaration] as to the manner of recording, date, time, ordinary practices, etc.
Again, almost never is an issue that is seriously argued.
God help us.
NOTE: Neither of these methods is to establish what should or should not be interpreted. This is how to authenticate those videos to be intro’d into evidence - only that they are what they purport to be.
“The question not asked by Tucker was Now what? What are you or his current legal team going to do about these videos?”
It was known well before the Tucker programs this week the government was withholding evidence, particularly the videos. Yet there was no concerted effort by the defendant’s attorneys to appeal to higher courts, and the Supreme Court about the denial of due process rights by judges and the DOJ.
It was clear the federal bureaucracy, senior politicians of both parties, and federal judges in Washington were working together to make an example of anyone they could possibly pin a charge on who was at the Trump rally or on the grounds of the Capitol. Certainly the legal community knew this and the best attorneys did not take these cases. Few of the defendants had the resources to hire top legal counsel much less pay for the appeals required to get to the Supreme Court. The government purposefully held them in prison, without trial, to wear them down to plea in order to get on with their lives. Now the government can talk about the hundreds of guilty verdicts, most of which were coerced through denial of due process and the inability of the defendants to secure competent legal counsel.
Any young attorney representing these people had to know that if she/he pushed too hard, their future careers would be affected. Wheres in the past some great jurists have taken “hopeless” cases, for these cases the aristocracy of the legal profession, including the most prominent civil libertarians, turned their back. Providing any of the January 6 defendants a strong defense was a career ending move and would result in damnation by the captive media who gave up their independence years ago.
Sadly, few Republican lawmakers have addressed this travesty of justice. They should be in unison expressing outrage about the denial of constitution rights of due process to their constituents. Instead they openly violate their oath of office to defend the Constitution, by their inaction and condemnation of the defendants in mass. I am particularly disgusted by the statements of my Republican Senator Thom Tillis this week who lined up with Romney and McConnell to speak out against Tucker Carlson and Fox News.
The Tucker tapes, and the reaction of the establishment organizations and politicians to them, are further evidence that the Constitution is no longer respected by those in power. The tyranny the founders feared, is virtually unopposed. When the leaders of the two parties in the Senate openly state what the press should and should not report, it is evident neither have respect for the rights of citizens guaranteed by the Constitution they swore to protect. That they dare to do so without universal condemnation suggests the people of the nation have accepted their chains.
Last note from the court trenches:
Judge does have the power to call a hearing, all by himself, and ask the prosecution (1) these vids real or not (2) if real, why did you fail to disclose [there is no legally sufficient reason BTW. It is an absolute requirement. Gov has NO discretion of what evidence is turned over. If the gov. doesn’t want it given to the defendant for some reason, then the remedy is not to bring charges].
If unsatisfied with the answers, the judge could, right then and there, vacate the conviction as it was predicated upon a clear, unambiguous and damaging violation of constitutional rights and dismiss all charges as a sanction against the state for that violation. This process is in the statutes and is inherent in the court’s power to rectify injustice - statute or no statute.
BTW - Judge could order a hearing for tomorrow morning if he wanted. That he hasn’t is another nail in the “trial was fixed” coffin.
..........so, why do you think Shaman’s lawyer did not use this video?
Remember the article I was reading and commenting on stated the video (portions of Shaman walking the halls) had been out a long time ago.
Why is he an “ex” lawyer of the Shaman?
“So, I THINK (I’m not a lawyer) Shaman’s lawyer couldn’t admit into evidence what we are now seeing because of evidentiary rules barring him from doing so.”
I think chain of custody matters more for prosecutors. It may apply to both sides, but prosecutors are the ones who have restrictions on them to protect the rights of the accused. The government (the accuser) has no such rights to protect.
Release every second of video to everyone. Do the same thing with ever voters registration file in the US.
He said it on Tucker. The gov. hid it from the defense. They deep-sixed exculpatory evidence. This despite the deft’s direct requests and the gov’s duty to produce whether there is a request or not.
There is no more serious violation by a prosecution in a criminal trial. None.
The EX-LAWYER got the boy to
Take a plea bargain ...
.
Now What Horned Screwball ???
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.