"The back-to-back failures by prosecutors to secure an indictment amounted to a striking rejection of the administration's retribution campaign. It highlighted the Justice Department's unusual strategy of pursuing second indictments despite earlier failures in court and suggested the department would face major hurdles in bringing charges against President Trump's foes."
"Bruce Green, who teaches legal ethics at Fordham Law School in New York, said there was no constitutional provision forbidding the repeated presentation of the same case to different grand juries, though he added that most prosecutors would take a hint after being rejected once or twice. If a grand jury isn't indicting and you don't even have a lawyer on the other side presenting a defense, that's a pretty strong sign that you don't have a tryable case, he said."
"Yes, and the most major of these major hurdles is the fact that they're pure bullshit, and even members of a grand jury can see it."
A grand jury declined to indict New York Attorney General Letitia James after reviewing the evidence presented. Prosecutors pursued repeated presentations to multiple grand juries despite earlier rejections. Back-to-back grand jury refusals signaled a rejection of a retribution campaign and indicated major hurdles for pursuing second indictments after court setbacks. Legal ethicist Bruce Green noted there is no constitutional bar to repeating presentations but said most prosecutors would stop after one or two rejections. Grand jury refusals without defense presentations suggest weak or non-tryable cases.
Read at www.esquire.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]