Sure in a sane world maybe.
Posted on 06/13/2018 9:18:00 AM PDT by detective
Special counsel Robert Mueller and his deputy Rush Atkinson filed a 14-page motion Tuesday arguing that the government shouldn’t have to release certain evidence to indicted Russian company Concord Management and Consulting LLC due to ongoing “interference operations” against the United States.
In the motion, Mueller’s team requested a protective order to: (1) keep other co-defendants named in the February 16 indictment from accessing the government’s evidence against them; and (2) to keep additional evidence under the control of government attorneys and away from Concord Management itself.
As stated Mueller never thought that this company would actually come to court. Now they demand their rights to discovery and Mueller is boxed in. Bwahahahahaha
Trying to keep exculpatory evidence and other evidence from defendants isn’t that uncommon for prosecutors. Sometimes prosecutorial misconduct gets the cases dismissed.
I suspect Concord doesn’t WANT the case to be dismissed.
We can charge you with a crime but we don’t have to show you commotted it.
Heck, I charge Mueller with bank robbery.
Obam’s judges would, and have and will.
Staying within the bounds of legality, the defendants should demand post haste a speedy trial, and keep hammering it until a judge puts that hammer to Mueller. If you’re not ready for trial, don’t indict.
Evidence is not necessary to determine guilt. Hell, let’s do away with trials outright. If you are accused, you get sentenced.
They don’t want it to be dismissed soon, because the longer this goes on, the bigger the payout on their countersuit.
Mueller will be bankrupted by them, sued personally for civil rights violations.
"Sources and methods" is counter-intelligence language, not criminal prosecution language.
The whole of jurisprudence is based on challenging "sources and methods" before convicting someone of a crime.
-PJ
If the motion is denied watch them drop the charges. The last thing they want is to have to go through discovery. Scum and villainy.
Bobby can always look for work in Waco.
Too much time has passed. Most of these people have destroyed, discarded and scrubbed all incriminating evidence. Most of these people think nothing of lying under oath. Most of these people are willing to bribe and/or threaten witnesses. Some of them will even stoop to murder to eliminate evidence. Some of them are even faking mental disordrs to avoid prosecution (Pelosi, McCain). Furthermore, [think OJ, here] they have the best lawyers and unlimited cash.
Face it. NO ONE is going to jail.
The judge should refer him to the Bar for disbarment.
According to what he told the judge, he has no evidence!
But K. should not forget that the trial would not be public, if the court deems it necessary it can be made public but there is no law that says it has to be. As a result, the accused and his defence don't have access even to the court records, and especially not to the indictment, and that means we generally don't know - or at least not precisely - what the first documents need to be about, which means that if they do contain anything of relevance to the case it's only by a lucky coincidence. If anything about the individual charges and the reasons for them comes out clearly or can be guessed at while the accused is being questioned, then it's possible to work out and submit documents that really direct the issue and present proof, but not before. Conditions like this, of course, place the defence in a very unfavourable and difficult position. But that is what they intend. In fact, defence is not really allowed under the law, it's only tolerated, and there is even some dispute about whether the relevant parts of the law imply even that.
This must be Mueller's textbook from law school. (Sorry about the lack of paragrphs. My source was missing them.)
Wouldn’t the evidence have to be presented in an open trial anyway or is it going to be a hush hush secret trial?
Is this the same Mueller who wants to sit with Donald Trump and ask him a list of questions?
Have not heard too much of that lately, I suppose it is advancing as well as all Mueller fronts are.
Torquemada ... the Inquisition’s grand Inquisitor.
One note samba- and uses the muh russians crapola to cover his rather profitable actions from all the way back thru GW Bush- and his “extension of office” that obamaumao got him.
The Tres Amigos..... Mueller, Comey and .... Rosenstein.
What basis for not letting a defendant see the evidence against them.... a normal part of discovery under our legal system.... cause these are “special” defendants? Are they— any body else you’d deny regular court process to, Mr. Stasi? He is more destructive of our Republic than the “russians” ever could be— unless of course HE is a Russian agent in place— his actions could be construed as such— the global get rich game.
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.