Posted on 12/05/2005 1:38:06 PM PST by John Jorsett
No further info available yet.
Hannity just reported that "part" of the indictment has been "quashed."
bttt!!!!
wonder how big the coverage on this will be vs the initial charges by frauddy earle
Disbar Ronnie Earle. Prosecute Ronnie Earle.
Fox just announced the charges have been dropped.
Another attempt to over throw the elected government has been thwarted.
Alright!!!!
As Nelson from the Simpsons always says, "Ha!Ha!"
If this is true, Pelosi should be censured for making false statements about DeLay.
Talk about a one - two Punch to the jaw of the democratic party.....No Rove, No Delay.....sheesh next a person would think that the scooter indictment will fall down also!
Happy days are here again!!! Hip, hip, horay!!!
For repleading to get any forward motion for Earle, Earle needs to plead some more or new facts. This is the end, except for a possible appeal.
Not the whole story. One indictment thrown out. No trial until next year.
I wonder if it will include Rather, Barnes, Burnett and Mapes ..?? LOL!! Somebody had to say it!
SCOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh man! Would I love to be a fly on the wall when certain Dims hear the news! They are going to have "Elizabeth" fits!
Only the conspiracy charge.... per AP
http://ryanjames.tv/ryanvox/?p=180
DeLay's hopes dashed for quick end to case
Judge dismisses one felony indictment but upholds another
By R.G. RATCLIFFE
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau
AUSTIN — A senior district judge today dismissed one felony indictment but upheld another against U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, dashing DeLay's hopes for a speedy resolution to his case.
A quick ruling in DeLay's favor from Senior District Judge Pat Priest throwing the case out of court was crucial to the Sugar Land Republican's efforts to regain his post as U.S. House majority leader. He was forced to step down when he was indicted in September.
Priest had told DeLay's lawyers last month that if he upheld either of the indictments, he would be unable to hold a trial for DeLay before early next year.
House Republicans have indicated they wanted to hold a leadership election in January if DeLay was not cleared by then.
DeLay and two associates — John Colyandro of Austin and Jim Ellis of Washington, D.C. — were indicted on charges of conspiracy to violate the Texas election code, money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering in connection to 2002 legislative races.
Indictments returned in September and October accuse DeLay, Colyandro and Ellis of being involved in a scheme to flow allegedly illegal corporate money into 2002 Texas House races. The money laundering charges accuse them of running $190,000 in illegal corporate funds through the Republican National Committee.
Lawyers for the three argued that it was legal for the DeLay-founded Texans for a Republican Majority to raise corporate money so long as the money was not donated to candidates. They said there was no trade of funds with the Republican National Committee.
DeLay's legal team, headed by Dick DeGuerin of Houston, had challenged the indictments on numerous legal issues, but DeGuerin called two the "silver bullets."
Those points were that the state conspiracy law did not apply to the election code until a year after the 2002 elections.
The other was that the definition of money laundering did not include checks until 2005. TRMPAC transferred the $190,000 in corporate money to the RNC by using a check.
Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle brought the case against Delay as the statute of limitations was running out on 2002 election code violations. The indictments brought a wild legal ride.
After Earle learned there might be "technical" problems with a Sept. 28 indictment on conspiracy to violate the election code, he went to a second grand jury to seek the money laundering charges. The first grand jury had expired, and the second grand jury returned a no bill.
Then on Oct. 3, Earle asked a newly impaneled grand jury to indict Delay, Colyandro and Ellis on money laundering charges, and it did.
DeGuerin had asked to have the indictments dismissed because of prosecutorial misconduct. Priest said he would hear that motion only if he upheld the indictments against the legal challenges.
How about a civil suit against the prosecutor for wrongful prosecution ?
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.