placton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-01-10 10:01 PM
Original message |
Why the Blackwater Case Stinks |
|
Having practiced law in federal courts for about 30 years, the Blackwater case dismissal stinks. Federal judges (mostly appointed by wingers - Bushes/Reagan or kinda wingers - Clinton) ALWAYS find ways to get around "technical issues" in favor of government prosecutions. The only time they find - to their shock and dismay - that the govt has "erred" is in favor of the well connected. Trust me on this one: the fix was in!
BTW, I hate being so cynical, and I'd love to see federal judges enforce rights of citizens. But, with rare exceptions, they don't.
|
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-01-10 10:03 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Didn't we find out about a week ago that Eric Prince is CIA? |
|
Or did I just imagine that after too much turkey and cranberry sauce?
|
Fire_Medic_Dave
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-01-10 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. He tried to get in the CIA but couldn't. |
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-01-10 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
7. Politico and RawStory cite a Vanity Fair article that says he was |
|
an asset. I don't know about Politico and RawStory but Vanity Fair pays for good investigative reporting. http://www.politico.com/blogs/laurarozen/1209/Report_Blackwater_CEO_Eric_Prince_was_CIA_asset.html
|
Fire_Medic_Dave
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-01-10 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. Yes he was an asset because he couldn't get in. |
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-01-10 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
placton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-01-10 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
when I first started out defending folks in federal court, they got a fair shake - that has changed, and the appointments are all pro government - again with some rare exceptions - Clinton fucked us badly with his "moderate" appointments.
|
placton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-01-10 10:07 PM
Response to Original message |
4. had these defendants been black or hispanic |
|
charged with selling drugs - the judge would have excused the government behavior
|
Ian David
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-01-10 10:10 PM
Response to Original message |
5. I suppose the insurgents know how to find Blackwater's U.S. headquarters on a map. n/t |
FLDCVADem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-01-10 10:12 PM
Response to Original message |
6. seems to me the court did enforce the rights of citizens |
|
The federal government made a deal then reneged on it. My issue is with the immunity being granted in the first place, but once it was granted, the prosecutors shouldn't have used the statements in their case.
Why would you want a federal judge (or any judge, for that matter) to let something like this slide?
|
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-01-10 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
8. Could you explain the deal made and reneged on? |
|
I think I'm missing something here.
|
FLDCVADem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-01-10 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
11. When the killings were first being investigated |
|
the Blackwater guards were granted immunity in return for giving their statements. The immunity deal was that nothing in their statements could be used against them in any way should there eventually be criminal charges.
The prosecutors reneged on that deal by using the statements to obtain search warrants and to track down other evidence. The judge in the case, Justice Urbina, ruled that the government's case was built on evidence that was obtained by ignoring the immunity deal. As such, the evidence was thrown out, and as a result, the judge dismissed the case.
|
G_j
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-01-10 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
|
Edited on Fri Jan-01-10 10:47 PM by G_j
a simple way to derail the case, too easy,
|
EFerrari
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-01-10 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
d_b
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jan-02-10 12:19 AM
Response to Original message |
14. The Ted Stevens treatment |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 18th 2024, 06:31 PM
Response to Original message |