IllianaLancerContra Posted March 6, 2020 Share Posted March 6, 2020 1 minute ago, Jeff Ream said: No rumors? This is drum corps OK - I'll play. GH probably wants the death penalty off the table. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terri Schehr Posted March 6, 2020 Share Posted March 6, 2020 5 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said: No rumors? This is drum corps If you don’t know, nobody outside the principles know. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersop Posted March 6, 2020 Share Posted March 6, 2020 Public Record shows all info provided above ... plus: Count 1: Sexual Assault Count 2: Sexual Assault Count (3) 99,999: Sexual Assault (Changed) Changed from what? Was that an upgrade or downgrade? https://ujsportal.pacourts.us/DocketSheets/CourtSummaryReport.ashx?docketNumber=CP-39-CR-0005538-2018&dnh=ydjtESJlJf%2fH60wd1QajOg%3d%3d https://ujsportal.pacourts.us/DocketSheets/CPReport.ashx?docketNumber=CP-39-CR-0005538-2018&dnh=ydjtESJlJf%2fH60wd1QajOg%3d%3d You're welcome!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted March 6, 2020 Share Posted March 6, 2020 1 hour ago, IllianaLancerContra said: OK - I'll play. GH probably wants the death penalty off the table. wuss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hostrauser Posted March 6, 2020 Share Posted March 6, 2020 1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said: So what’s the deal? I believe the delay is due to George Hopkins trying to negotiate proper hash marks for his prison cell. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted March 7, 2020 Share Posted March 7, 2020 1 hour ago, hostrauser said: I believe the delay is due to George Hopkins trying to negotiate proper hash marks for his prison cell. He better hope for a more receptive audience than in the rose bowl 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Dixon Posted March 7, 2020 Share Posted March 7, 2020 2 hours ago, hostrauser said: I believe the delay is due to George Hopkins trying to negotiate proper hash marks for his prison cell. congratulations - you win the internet today & also you owe me half a beer I just choked on 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmhs59 Posted March 7, 2020 Share Posted March 7, 2020 5 hours ago, N.E. Brigand said: I believe this happens sometimes, although the barrier is pretty high. Jim notes one argument that is used in such cases is ineffective counsel: you fire your original lawyer and your new lawyer argues that your first lawyer really botched things. And as ILC notes, there's a risk in doing that. There's one federal case that's been in and out of the news over the past couple years where someone pleaded guilty to a crime, admitted in official court filings that he did it, wasn't charged with a number of more serious crimes that he apparently did, cooperated with prosecutors in providing evidence about other people's crimes, got a recommendation from prosecutors for a sentence of probation, stated under oath at his sentencing hearing that he committed the crime to which he had pleaded guilty, was met with some skepticism from the judge about whether he had done everything he could to help prosecutors, agreed to postpone the sentencing further so he could cooperate some more ... and then fired his lawyers and hired new ones, and then began to get uncooperative with prosecutors (so that one of their other cases got botched because they couldn't use his testimony), and then had his new lawyers throw up a one sketchy argument after another about how the prosecution had been unfair to him, all of which the judge shot down, and finally the defendant said that he's not actually guilty and that he had only said he was guilty because he was given bad advice by his original lawyers, so that there's going to have to be a hearing (or at least some depositions--confirmed just this week) in which his original lawyers will have to testify about whether or not they did their jobs. But even if the judge then lets him withdraw his plea, there's still the matter of his having testified under oath that he did the crime, which he now says isn't true (although he hasn't said that under oath yet), which means that the prosecutors could then go after him for perjury. So things like this do happen. For the sake of the victims, I hope that they don't happen in this case. From what I've gathered… General Flynn took the plea to protect his son. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skevinp Posted March 7, 2020 Share Posted March 7, 2020 22 minutes ago, cmhs59 said: From what I've gathered… General Flynn took the plea to protect his son. And facing bankruptcy after running out of money to defend himself against a deeply funded exercise of government power and resources. I would love to see a law that requires Congress to provide access to substantially equal legal defense funds to anyone it prosecutes, forces to testify, or the like. This isn’t political because it would provide justice to any so aggrieved individual regardless of political position or party. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted March 7, 2020 Share Posted March 7, 2020 5 hours ago, skevinp said: I would love to see a law that requires Congress to provide access to substantially equal legal defense funds to anyone it prosecutes, forces to testify, or the like. This isn’t political because it would provide justice to any so aggrieved individual regardless of political position or party. I'd certainly be OK with that, although I wouldn't limit it to people called to testify before Congress. Most defendants in regular criminal proceedings are at a great disadvantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.