[betty boop]

P.S.: Was that discussion on the same thread wherein it was reported that a sitting state judge three times in a for-attribution interview with the press, stated that Matthews had militia ties?

Well isn't that special! Don't you think it's a little unprofessional for a sitting judge to be making statements like that before the Grand Jury is convened -- or at any time after, for that matter? One might think such remarks might be intended to prejudice the jury.

[Poohbah]

Was that discussion on the same thread wherein it was reported that a sitting state judge three times in a for-attribution interview with the press, stated that Matthews had militia ties?

No.

Well isn't that special! Don't you think it's a little unprofessional for a sitting judge to be making statements like that before the Grand Jury is convened -- or at any time after, for that matter? One might think such remarks might be intended to prejudice the jury.

It was probably the judge who had to hear Don's case in 1998. And he can damn well say what he wants, because he will NOT be hearing anything coming out of the Grand Jury, as he will have a prejudiced view of the case from having dealt with Don.

[wimpycat]

Do you believe he said those remarks? After all, it's only hearsay, remember? And you wouldn't want to comment on hearsay, now would you?