Walton: Libby's "Supervised Release" begins now.

[kpete]

Walton: Libby's "Supervised Release" begins now.

Judge Walton released a memorandum opinion today in the Libby case. You can see it here.
https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2005cr0394-390

It is not surprising, but it certainly raises an interesting question in my mind.

more at:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/7/12/124134/598

[Hepburn]

1. So.......

......since that places Libby on probation, then he can be violated if he screws up. Well, that is something....and hopefully the arrogant, lying POS will screw up.

<sigh>

[zbdent]

2. He should be videotaped constantly ...

if he were a Dem and he jaywalked, he would be thrown into the slammer so fast it would make Ann Coulter's Adam's Apple spin ...

[Gregorian]

4. Thanks. Even if that's not a thought I want.

Haha.

What a sick place we're in. I wish I could fuel my car on disgust.

[bdamomma]

7. you would probably get alot of mileage that is for sure

[Patsy Stone]

3. That's a whole lot of footnotes.

K&R

[blondeatlast]

5. Walton has anticipated the next WH move from day one; anyone wanna play parse the footnotes?

Sorry, fellow DUers, it's an Adobe file so can't copy and paste, but Walton is clearly anticipating the next move.

[blondeatlast]

6. How quickly we forget? Why is this sinking like a rock?

:shrug: :kick:

[Blackhatjack]

8. Supervised probation is always an opportunity for the defendant to screw up....

and there are separate repercussions for violating probation from the penalty imposed on the underlying crime.

A condition of any kind of supervised probation is that you not violate any laws during the pendency of the probation.

If Libby were to be called to testify under oath anywhere and he testified untruthfully, that would start the ball rolling for not only a new charge of lying under oath but a violation of the terms of his probation --pulling him back in front of Judge Walton again.

[blondeatlast]

9. I'm thinking walton is setting him up to fail with all the footnotes

specifically directed at what the WH may be up to.

For that, I say more power to Judge Walton!

[SoCalDem]

10. So.. if he screws up on his supervised release, he goes back to ..wait

NOTHING AT ALL happens to him...

It's all a cruel JOKE.. The non-pardon keeps him from having immunity and as long as Scooter keeps his trap shut and does not tell where the "bodies are buried", he gets a lifetime ride on the Cheney Gravytrain..

[Blackhatjack]

13. Sorry but you are wrong... there can be ADDITIONAL penalties....

The act of violating one's probation is an event that the Court can punish with jail time and/or other sanctions, independent of any active prison term hanging over a defendants head.

In many cases the judge orders a defendant to serve 30 days in jail as punishment for a minor probation violation WITHOUT activating the balance of the active term of imprisonment hanging over the defendant's head.

Libby could be punished for violating the terms of his supervised probation even though there is ano active prison term hanging over him now that Bush commuted that part of his sentence.

Common probation violations include use of drugs, alcohol, refusing to submit to a drug or alcohol test, failing to call his probation officier, missing meetings with his probation officer, moving without notifying the probation office, engaging in conduct that results in criminal charges of any kind(which would include committing perjury or obstruction of justice for conduct not a part of the underlying offense for which he has been sentenced --ie. new testimony under oath which is false), etc.

Libby could violate one or more of these (and/or others not listed) and Judge Walton would be well within his authority to issue a punishment independent of the sentence Libby already received.

[MagickMuffin]

11. Off to the Greatest

and a :kick: to boot

Hopefully Scooter will get an angry probation officer...

[Usrename]

12. I can't help but wonder how this will affect the civil case.

How cagey can he get now when they call him to testify about other peoples involvement?

Could he end up in jail if he obviscates, since he is on supervised release?

[blondeatlast]

15. I scanned the footnotes a bit, and numbers 1 and 8 seem to indicate

that Walton expects this to happen and he's already laid out his (Walton's) case in advance.

I'm hardly a legal expert, but it appears Walton is like a good chess player; always anticipating.

[H2O Man]

16. If Libby

were to violate an order in the civil trial, that brings a civil penalty. It is distinct from the criminal case. If the civil case goes forward, and Libby is involved and provides any testimony, it is safe to assume he will tell the same basic set of lies once again.

[Usrename]

17. Well then I hope they take him to the cleaners.

If he can refuse to testify then why didn't Clinton do that in the Paula Jones case. Was Clinton really that stoopid? You mean he could have just told them to pound salt? Arrrrrrrrggghhhhh...

[H2O Man]

18. No.

I did not mean to imply anything about the Clinton case.

[malaise]

14. K & R n/t

[Spazito]

19. Interesting, Judge Walton cites the Rita case in his footnote 1,

the case that has been used on DU and elsewhere as a comparison to the libby sentence of 30 months prison sentence, and he goes into great detail on this case. Judge Walton's outrage at bush's actions leap off the page when reading footnote 1.

This whole opinion is scathing with regard to bush's actions, here is just one example:

"Thus, while this court believes that the facts of this case are at least somewhat distinguishable from Schick, see supra,n.7, and despite what this Court perceives as a greater intrusion by the President into the legislative arena in this case than occurred in Schick, it is compelled, in the absence of more specific guidance from the Supreme Court that would merit a different result, to conclude that the sweeping and expansive language of the Schick majority sanctions what the President has done here. For this reason, the Court cannot say that the conditions of commutation imposed by the President in this instance are constitutionally objectionable."