Special prosecutors seek to quash subpoenas from Paxton’s defense team

[TexasTowelie]

Special prosecutors in the securities fraud case against Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a motion Tuesday to quash the defense’s requests made last week for grand jury information.

Defense attorneys for Paxton had filed five applications for subpoenas.

One requested a complete transcript and audio recording on the selection process for the grand jury that indicted him. The prosecutors motion states: “Nothing about the selection and empanelment of this grand jury has any bearing whatsoever on the ultimate facts that are of consequence in this matter.”

Three other applications requested the same information on the other grand juries selected in 2015 – one in the current July-December term and two in the January-June term. None of those three grand juries heard evidence from the state on Paxton’s criminality, according to the prosecutors’ motion. Prosecutors deemed this information immaterial.

Read more: http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2015/10/special-prosecutors-seek-to-quash-subpoenas-from-paxtons-defense-team.html/

Updated at 4:15 p.m.: The next court hearing in Paxton’s case has been set to take up these subpoena questions. The parties will gather before Judge George Gallagher in Fort Work at 1 p.m. Friday.

[Gothmog]

1. These subpoenas are bogus

This is going to be a nasty fight

[DhhD]

2. We knew this was coming when before the grand jury met, all of the names of the jurors were

made public. This was in Collin County, City of McKinney.

Seems like in another separate trial in another county, the defendant made public statements about knowing who the grand jurors were. This trial was set up in Travis County, City of Austin, Texas.

Is there a difference between city, county and federal grand jurors with respect to laws of governance?