Actual things that happened in the indictment of Comey - CASE IS DISMISSED - LETICIA JAMES too

  • Thread starter Thread starter altmin
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 60
  • Views: 2K
  • Politics 


“… The Justice Department's defense of the handling of the case came after U.S. Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick, in Alexandria, Virginia, ruled on Monday that Halligan may have made significant legal errors in presenting evidence and instructing grand jurors who were weighing whether to charge Comey. Fitzpatrick ordered prosecutors to turn over the grand jury materials to Comey's lawyers.

… Fitzpatrick, who was tasked with deciding certain pretrial issues in Comey's case, highlighted a variety of procedural errors that could endanger the case.

Among the blunders he cited were prosecutors' decision to review evidence the FBI seized years earlier without securing a new warrant and allowing an FBI agent to testify to the grand jury even though the agent may have been exposed to material shielded by attorney-client privilege, a legal doctrine that protects legal advice between lawyers and their clients.

Fitzpatrick also found that Halligan made statements to grand jurors harmful to Comey's legal rights, and questioned whether she presented the current version of the indictment Comey is facing to the grand jury, after it rejected a criminal count in a prior version.

At Wednesday's hearing before Nachmanoff, prosecutors acknowledged that the current version of the indictment was not presented to the entire grand jury, but was signed by the jury foreperson - an admission that raises questions about the validity of the case.

Grand jury materials are secret and rarely shared with defense lawyers in criminal cases, and in ordering that the material be turned over to the defense, Fitzpatrick acknowledged that it was an "extraordinary remedy."…”
 
nycfan said:


“… The Justice Department's defense of the handling of the case came after U.S. Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick, in Alexandria, Virginia, ruled on Monday that Halligan may have made significant legal errors in presenting evidence and instructing grand jurors who were weighing whether to charge Comey. Fitzpatrick ordered prosecutors to turn over the grand jury materials to Comey's lawyers.

… Fitzpatrick, who was tasked with deciding certain pretrial issues in Comey's case, highlighted a variety of procedural errors that could endanger the case.

Among the blunders he cited were prosecutors' decision to review evidence the FBI seized years earlier without securing a new warrant and allowing an FBI agent to testify to the grand jury even though the agent may have been exposed to material shielded by attorney-client privilege, a legal doctrine that protects legal advice between lawyers and their clients.

Fitzpatrick also found that Halligan made statements to grand jurors harmful to Comey's legal rights, and questioned whether she presented the current version of the indictment Comey is facing to the grand jury, after it rejected a criminal count in a prior version.

At Wednesday's hearing before Nachmanoff, prosecutors acknowledged that the current version of the indictment was not presented to the entire grand jury, but was signed by the jury foreperson - an admission that raises questions about the validity of the case.

Grand jury materials are secret and rarely shared with defense lawyers in criminal cases, and in ordering that the material be turned over to the defense, Fitzpatrick acknowledged that it was an "extraordinary remedy."…”
Click to expand...

“… Nachmanoff temporarily paused Fitzpatrick's order asking prosecutors to hand over grand jury materials to the defense, after the Justice Department objected….”
 
I am not an expert in criminal law but, notwithstanding the dismissal without prejudice, I don't see how the government could bring this case again. As I understand it, defects with the indictment can be cured and the statute of limitations will be deemed to have been tolled. But this is not a defect with the indictment. It's a finding that Halligan had no authority to bring the indictment. I don't see how that would toll the SOL, which has now run.

In the long run, this is probably the best of all the bad alternatives for Trump because DOJ was going to be humiliated in this case regardless of how it proceeded. But it's still damn embarrassing.
 
lawtig02 said:
I am not an expert in criminal law but, notwithstanding the dismissal without prejudice, I don't see how the government could bring this case again. As I understand it, defects with the indictment can be cured and the statute of limitations will be deemed to have been tolled. But this is not a defect with the indictment. It's a finding that Halligan had no authority to bring the indictment. I don't see how that would toll the SOL, which has now run.

In the long run, this is probably the best of all the bad alternatives for Trump because DOJ was going to be humiliated in this case regardless of how it proceeded. But it's still damn embarrassing.
Click to expand...
Yeah personally I think it would be better in the long run for the prosecutions to fail on the merits, rather than on procedural grounds. But it definitely is still embarrassing,
 
So can Comey and Tish now file million dollar defamation lawsuits and argue their case on the grounds of malicious indictment/ prosecution ?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top