Feds obtain sealed case of Ritter's arrest

AP | 1/25/03

[nicmarlo]

Hah!!! another great toon, meekie.....you're the best at finding them.

[nicmarlo]

very good post, spectre......excellent!

[spectre]

Maybe Crier has her own "sources"..she was a Judge, ya know!

My pleasure. I love catchin these people with their pants down around their ankles..:~)

sw

[nicmarlo]

I love catchin these people with their pants down around their ankles..:~)

You mean, how Ritter was almost caught in the, uh, same predicament? : )

[doug from upland]

That's great.

[WL-law]

Is it true that sealing a criminal record means that the person who was accused is prohibited from talking about the case, even if he wants to? Perhaps some lawyer here could shed some light on that question.

It is most definitely NOT true, as we have clarified on other Ritter threads. Ritter's lawyer, yes, the prosecution, yes, but Ritter himself - NO.

[nicmarlo]

: )

[ned13]

I haven't been in Albany for almost 11 years. When I knew him he was a Democrat. I wasn't aware that he had changed sides and even called my family before my post to confirm he was still with the Democrats. They knew he was a judge but since they do not live in Colonie so they wouldn't have known.

[Grampa Dave]

Great! He does reek like used and rotten old Kitty Ritter!

[WL-law]

READERS of the New York Times, as of yesterday, still hadn't been informed of Scott Ritter's sex-sting arrest.

This fact is KEY to my theory of Ritter's 'conversion", in that it proves, ex post facto, that he left media is absolutely and totally INCURIOUS about the personal 'shortcomings' of someone who serves the left's political purposes -- all of this is laid out in Ann Coulter's "Slander", for example.

Scott knew that moving left would be the best way to "seal his case" forever -- and it worked for a while.

[Mustang]

"...who she hangs around with..."

My guess...The Hildebeast.

I may be 100% wrong...but, as I mentioned in a thread several weeks ago, it smacks and smells of a Toon Operation.

Consider: The Toon machine knew of Ritter's baggage. HRC initiated the Charles Colson tenet, "If you got'em by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow"...

The above mentioned June 2001 date is bogus. Ritter had stuff bunched up his jockey shorts way before. He was a perfect target for the left to blackmail. Don't get me wrong...Ritter's a dirt bag...just hope the lame-stream press follows the dirt.

Mustang sends.

[Grampa Dave]

The biggest coverup in the smelly Kitty Ritter Case has been the spiking of this news by the left wing mediot publisher/editors in bed with their Kitty Ritter.

If Kitty Ritter had been a conservative wanting to end Soddomite's WMD program, in 2 days after his arrest, the entire world would have known about it.

The NY Slimes the leader of lies, spiking the real stories and printing DNC mantras as news still had not printed a single line about Kitty Ritter's arrest:

Posted on 01/25/2003 3:28 AM EST by kattracks

READERS of the New York Times, as of yesterday, still hadn't been informed of Scott Ritter's sex-sting arrest. Ritter is the former UN arms inspector who has lately been defending Saddam Hussein to become a darling of the anti-war movement. The news of his arrest nearly two years ago - allegedly for trying to lure a 16-year-old girl he contacted on the Internet for sex - broke a week ago in the Schenectady Gazette. The Post and many other newspapers carried the story after the Associated Press had it on Tuesday. But not a word in the Times. When The Post's Fred Dicker called Ritter the "Pee-wee Herman of the anti-war movement" on the Don Imus radio show yesterday, Imus said Dicker was being "unfair to Pee-wee."

My oldest son and DIL just gave me Anne Coulter's book, Slander, and this episode is typical of what she has highlighted in her book.

[MeekOneGOP]

Thanks...

[WL-law]

Regarding the news that the Feds, i.e., US Attorney has requested the file and is re-investigating the case:

There is no "double jeopardy" in such instance. The USSC, in U.S. v. Lanza (1922) and Abbate v. U.S. (1959) has affirmed the 'dual sovereignty" principle, that "an act denounced as a crime by both national and state sovereignties in an offense against the peace and dignity of both and may be punished by each".

So -- let's see what the Feds come up with. Hmm. Using the internet means using a Federally regulated communications system.

[Howlin]

See 332.

[Howlin]

She also said he was on the PAYROLL of the Bush recount in Florida. And she "suggested" the judge might have leaked the file as a payback to Bush.

I'm writing some emails today.

[TLBSHOW]

btt

[cyncooper]

Regarding the media handling. I posted on this thread:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/829768/posts?page=51#51

Posts 51 and 52 the following info from today's "Reliable Resources" on CNN:

#51
Howard Kurtz talking about this right now on "Reliable Resources". He has Fred Dicker from the NY Post who says by this point he can't fathom, but has his ideas, why the NY and LA Times won't touch the story, and major networks.

Newsweek guy on saying this story is not in the upcoming issue as it involves "an already marginalized voice"! Kurtz, to his credit, sounds a bit incredulous at this offering from the Newsweek twerp. Dicker says if it was a pro-Bush voice you can bet they all would be covering it.

#52
Both guests agree Ritter is damaged goods and no longer will be sought as an anti-war voice.

Dicker just threw out there's the possibility that Ritter has been blackmailed over this. Kurtz hastens to say that's just speculation on his part. Dicker says "of course, it's the speculation by a lot of people, too".

[Miss Marple]

OK..now we have non-coverage in The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, and Newweek. I assume no coverage in the latter two means no coverage in The Washington Post.

Sometimes the absence of tracks is a valuable clue. I think we should start a thread where we track exactly where and when the story appears in regioinal and national papers.

[TLBSHOW]

bttt