Obama judge denies Roger Stone request's for retrial amid increasing evidence of jury bias

[TLK Valentine]

You guys are almost embarrassing....!

almost?

I'm legitimately curious about where the line is that has not (yet) been crossed...

 

[Bobber]

What was that?

How about sending a swat team to his home to arrest him at around 5:30 in the morning with oh what a coincidence....CNN just happened to be there too with cameras there to film the whole thing! You don't find that in any way extreme?

 

[Vylo]

"I demand a retrial! These people are biased against me based on the evidence being presented!"

 

[essentialsaltes]

How about sending a swat team to his home to arrest him at around 5:30 in the morning

That didn't happen.

However, as usual, FBI sends a bunch of agents in the morning to avoid any potential for fight or flight or destruction of evidence.

 

[Uber Genius]

What exactly is "prosecutor bias"?

When a prosecutor offers a nine-year recommendation for one person accused of crimes and 3.5 years is the standard average for others. When a prosecutor is aware that a juror is biased and doesn't inform the judge. Oh... sorry...that is called judicial misconduct.

So sometime it goes the way of Stone, sometimes it appears ridiculously lenient, as with Jeffrey Epstein's initial sentence.

Although the US Justice Dept is supposedly filled with 19 Democrats to every 1 Republican, the rest of the Federal Prosecution seems more representative of the population at large. Prosecution bias occurs at state and local levels as well.

I have been in civil cases where a city prosecutor approached me asking about criminal evidence against the individual I was sueing. When I asked why he was interested, he said he was aware of several previous criminal violations where, due to the defendant's political affiliations, no charges were brought by the previous city prosecutor.

 

[Bobber]

That didn't happen.

However, as usual, FBI sends a bunch of agents in the morning to avoid any potential for fight or flight or destruction of evidence.

Oh come on! Did they do that with Hillary Clinton when they so called investigated her?

 

[TLK Valentine]

How about sending a swat team to his home to arrest him at around 5:30 in the morning with oh what a coincidence....CNN just happened to be there too with cameras there to film the whole thing! You don't find that in any way extreme?

Not at all. CNN was watching his house waiting for the inevitable arrest... the SWAT team chose to enter at an unusual hour to deny him the opportunity to destroy incriminating evidence.

If you consider both the news media and law enforcement acting prudently and competently to be "extreme," well... I can't help you there. Raise your expectations.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Oh come on! Did they do that with Hillary Clinton when they so called investigated her?

Hillary has not been indicted for any crimes. You don't arrest people just because some yahoos chant "Lock her up" very loudly.

Not yet, anyway.

 

[Belk]

When a prosecutor offers a nine-year recommendation for one person accused of crimes and 3.5 years is the standard average for others. When a prosecutor is aware that a juror is biased and doesn't inform the judge. Oh... sorry...that is called judicial misconduct.

It is now judicial misconduct for a prosecutor to have knowledge of bias?

So sometime it goes the way of Stone, sometimes it appears ridiculously lenient, as with Jeffrey Epstein's initial sentence.

So now it is bias to follow the federal sentencing guidelines?

Although the US Justice Dept is supposedly filled with 19 Democrats to every 1 Republican, the rest of the Federal Prosecution seems more representative of the population at large. Prosecution bias occurs at state and local levels as well.

I have been in civil cases where a city prosecutor approached me asking about criminal evidence against the individual I was sueing. When I asked why he was interested, he said he was aware of several previous criminal violations where, due to the defendant's political affiliations, no charges were brought by the previous city prosecutor.

Sure you have.

 

[Uber Genius]

It is now judicial misconduct for a prosecutor to have knowledge of bias?

American Bar Association
Standard 3-6.3 Selection of Jurors
(e) A prosecutor who learns reasonably reliable information that there was a problem with jury deliberations or conduct that could support an attack on a judgment of conviction and that is recognized as potentially valid in the jurisdiction, should promptly report that information to the appropriate judicial officer and, unless the court orders otherwise, defense counsel.

So you seem to be both deeply ignorant of this topic and too apathetic to take 30-seconds to research it before you decided to post a picture of a bird.

 

[Uber Genius]

So now it is bias to follow the federal sentencing guidelines?

Here again, any search would have brought out the facts that the US Fed Prosecutors guidelines were more than doubled in the Stone case. Similarly, there were dozens of article about how the prosecution of Epstein seemed to be ridiculously lenient compared to similar cases.

Ignorant and lazy is no way to go through life.

You are now on the "Ignore" pile.

 

[Uber Genius]

Hillary has not been indicted for any crimes. You don't arrest people just because some yahoos chant "Lock her up" very loudly.

Not yet, anyway.

you lock them up for obstruction of justice.


"Hillary Clinton’s aides may have obstructed justice by having her emails deleted, the top investigator for the U.S. House charged Tuesday in a letter asking the federal prosecutor in Washington, D.C., to probe the matter.

The computer team Mrs. Clinton hired erased tens of thousands of her emails, even though they were subject to a subpoena and preservation order from Congress, according to the FBI’s investigative notes, some of which were released last week.

The mass-deletion came just days after Platte River Networks, the company Mrs. Clinton hired to handle her server, had a conference call with Mrs. Clinton’s lawyers, who had been in charge of going through the emails, said Rep. Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight Committee."

see more: Clinton team may be guilty of obstruction of justice: GOP chairman

So destroying subpoenaed emails is not obstruction of justice?

Remember what your fellow atheist Bill Maher said about Hillary in a CNN interview,

"“She committed obstruction of justice” by “smashing up phones and hard drives,” Maher said, adding, “Now, Trump did, I think, in much worse fashion.”

But that was before Trump was exonerated and the Russia hoax was exposed as starting with...wait for it...Hillary's own campaign, her lawyers, her PR firm and over 51 fisa rules infractions.

So I guess if Maher were honest, which I believe he is occasionally, he would have to drop the second part about Trump and just stay with the facts, Hillary committed obstruction of justice."

 

[Arcangl86]

American Bar Association
Standard 3-6.3 Selection of Jurors
(e) A prosecutor who learns reasonably reliable information that there was a problem with jury deliberations or conduct that could support an attack on a judgment of conviction and that is recognized as potentially valid in the jurisdiction, should promptly report that information to the appropriate judicial officer and, unless the court orders otherwise, defense counsel.

So you seem to be both deeply ignorant of this topic and too apathetic to take 30-seconds to research it before you decided to post a picture of a bird.

The fact that the forewoman was a former Democratic candidate for Congress was disclosed during vor dire. There was no misconduct here.

 

[essentialsaltes]

you lock them up for obstruction of justice.

She has not been indicted for that crime. Or any other crime. So there is no need to lock her up.

"Hillary Clinton’s aides may have obstructed justice by having her emails deleted, the top investigator for the U.S. House charged Tuesday in a letter asking the federal prosecutor in Washington, D.C., to probe the matter.

That story is from September 2016. Did the prosecutor bring any indictments?

So destroying subpoenaed emails is not obstruction of justice?

After investigation, no charges were brought.

Remember what your fellow atheist Bill Maher

I don't remember that, but his opinion doesn't really mean anything special to me just because he is a 'fellow atheist'.

 

[Belk]

American Bar Association
Standard 3-6.3 Selection of Jurors
(e) A prosecutor who learns reasonably reliable information that there was a problem with jury deliberations or conduct that could support an attack on a judgment of conviction and that is recognized as potentially valid in the jurisdiction, should promptly report that information to the appropriate judicial officer and, unless the court orders otherwise, defense counsel.

So you seem to be both deeply ignorant of this topic and too apathetic to take 30-seconds to research it before you decided to post a picture of a bird.

Odd. No mention of judicial misconduct. Nor anything about bias being "a problem with jury deliberations or conduct that could support an attack on a judgment".

Here again, any search would have brought out the facts that the US Fed Prosecutors guidelines were more than doubled in the Stone case. Similarly, there were dozens of article about how the prosecution of Epstein seemed to be ridiculously lenient compared to similar cases.

Cool. Got a link?

Ignorant and lazy is no way to go through life.

You are now on the "Ignore" pile.

Oh noes! I guess I won't be getting a link anytime soon.

 

[summerville]

From the "As if prosecutor bias wasn't bad enough", files: Judge rejects Roger Stone request for a new trial

Judge Amy Jackson, the Obama appointee who handled Stone’s case for nearly a year and presided over the two-week jury trial last November, rejected Stone’s claim that he was entitled to a new trial following his defense team’s allegations of “bias” regarding one of the jurors.
...
Trump also criticized Jackson on Tuesday.

“Is this the Judge that put Paul Manafort in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT, something that not even mobster Al Capone had to endure?” Trump tweeted. “How did she treat Crooked Hillary Clinton? Just asking!”

Jackson presided over a number of other spinoff cases from Mueller’s two-year investigation, including against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, former Trump campaign deputy-turned-government’s witness Rick Gates, and former Obama White House counsel Greg Craig.

​

More info on the jury foreperson: Roger Stone jury foreperson's anti-Trump social media posts surface after she defends DOJ prosecutors

Former Memphis City Schools Board President Tomeka Hart revealed Wednesday that she was the foreperson of the jury that convicted former Trump adviser Roger Stone on obstruction charges last year -- and soon afterward, her history of Democratic activism and a string of her anti-Trump, left-wing social media posts came to light.
...
Meanwhile, it emerged that U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson had denied a defense request to strike a potential juror who was Obama-era press official with admitted anti-Trump views -- and whose husband worked at the same Justice Department division that handled the probe leading to Stone's arrest. And, another Stone juror, Seth Cousins, donated to former Democratic presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke and other progressive causes, federal election records reviewed by Fox News show.

The revelations came as Trump has called the handling of Stone's prosecution "ridiculous" and a demonstrably unfair "insult to our country." They raised the prospect that Stone's team could again seek a new trial, especially if Hart provided inaccurate responses under oath on her pretrial questionnaires concerning social media activity.​

Manafort was NOT ever in solitary confinement. He had his own shower and a telephone in his cell.

 

[jgarden]

Roger Stone was found guilty on all 7 counts:
- 1 count of obstruction of an official proceeding
- 5 counts of false statements -- including lying to Congress
- 1 count of witness tampering in special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe



What you need to know about the indictment against Roger Stone

 

[cow451]

You were expecting them to turn the other cheek?

Do you?

Instead they are kissing one of the President’s cheeks.

 

[Arcangl86]

Here again, any search would have brought out the facts that the US Fed Prosecutors guidelines were more than doubled in the Stone case. Similarly, there were dozens of article about how the prosecution of Epstein seemed to be ridiculously lenient compared to similar cases.

Ignorant and lazy is no way to go through life.

You are now on the "Ignore" pile.

I read the sentencing memorandum. They explained exactly why they recommended the sentence they did, with reference to both the Guidelines and appropriate case law explaining it.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Oh come on! Did they do that with Hillary Clinton when they so called investigated her?

Big difference -- Hillary was never arrested.

Gnash your teeth at that all you wish.