Posted on 09/11/2023 6:21:45 AM PDT by CFW
It was a surreal experience,” attorney and election-law expert Cleta Mitchell told The Federalist, referring to the hours-long questioning she faced when called before the Fulton County special purpose grand jury.
“I knew coming out of there that the whole thing was a loose cannon,” Mitchell said, adding that “they were definitely going to recommend indicting basically all the Trump allies — it was a completely political situation — nothing to do with the law. NOTHING.”
With Friday’s release of the grand jury’s final report, Mitchell, who had represented former President Trump in his challenge to the Georgia 2020 election, is now speaking out. The report confirms Mitchell’s intuition: The grand jury recommended District Attorney Fani Willis charge a total of 39 people — “basically all the Trump allies” — not merely the 19 individuals the get-Trump prosecutor eventually indicted. The large number includes Sen. Lindsey Graham and former Republican Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, both of Georgia. Like Graham, Perdue, and Loeffler, Mitchell was recommended for charges but not named in the sprawling RICO indictment handed down last month.
Now that the report is “all out in the open,” Mitchell is sharing some details of her experience, and they reveal just how unhinged from reality the special purpose grand jury — or at least its forewoman, Emily Kohrs — was.
Mitchell explained to The Federalist that when testifying, she had taken with her copies of the election-contest complaint and the memorandum of law filed with the court in support of that complaint. “At some point, the chairwoman that you’ve seen on TV,” a reference to Kohrs who had made the media rounds shortly after the special purpose grand jury disbanded, “asked me what I had in my hands,” Mitchell explained.
(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...
In 1933 the UK did away with the grand jury system as did the rest of the common law AngloSphere world. We are the remaining exception. Why did they do it? Too easy to abuse as we are seeing right now. It’s a completely one-sided affair, the defense has no say. The grand jury only sees one side. It tilts the playing way against the accused, biases the jury pool when it’s time to come to trial. If “the state” has reason to call a grand jury it might as well do the trial where the defense has a say. The present system seems to do little for civil rights. Our fellow colleagues in the Anglo-Sphere came to that conclusion some time ago, it time we did!
bttt
.
Yes, I hated it. I was a teenager at the time. My younger siblings liked it. I thought it was stupid.................
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.