DeLay Seeks Testimony of Grand Jurors - AP

[WillyT]

<snip>

AUSTIN (AP) -- Rep. Tom DeLay's attorneys filed a subpoena Thursday seeking the testimony of grand jurors, including those who indicted the former House majority leader and those who rejected charges.

DeLay's legal team wants to prove prosecutorial misconduct by District Attorney Ronnie Earle, who they say "shopped around" the campaign finance case against DeLay to three different grand juries before finding one that would indict DeLay on money laundering and conspiracy charges.

State law prohibits prosecutors from attending grand jury deliberations, but the defense alleges that Earle unlawfully participated in the second grand jury's deliberations and tried to force those grand jurors to indict DeLay. Earle denies the allegations.

Grand jury testimony is secret and Earle does not have to release transcripts unless he's ordered to by a court, so the defense has asked Senior Judge Pat Priest to allow the grand jurors to testify.

<snip>

Link: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DELAY_INDICTMENT?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=customwire.htm

Looks like 'ole Tom is "shopping around" too!

Man... you can almost smell the desperation from here, no???

:rofl::spank::rofl:

[oregonindy]

1. any legal eagles that can tell us if this can derail the case?

[jsamuel]

2. he has no chance of winning the case so he is trying to nullify it

[0007]

3. Tom's smile is starting to have that constipated look.

Perhaps a good dump would help 'eh?

[WillyT]

4. LOL !!!

:hurts:

[HuffleClaw]

5. attacking the attackers ?

the time-honoured strategy of the scoundrel. he's soooo screwed.

[Historic NY]

6. I don't think they can be compelled, then again this is Texas...

and its not a typical grand jury system. I found this in Texas Codes: its says may testify.

http://www.courts.state.tx.us/publicinfo/TRE/tre-98.htm

RULE 606. COMPETENCY OF JUROR AS A WITNESS

(a) At the Trial. A member of the jury may not testify as a witness before that jury in the trial of the case in which the juror is sitting as a juror. If the juror is called so to testify, the opposing party shall be afforded an opportunity to object out of the presence of the jury.

(b) Inquiry Into Validity of Verdict or Indictment. Upon an inquiry into the validity of a verdict or indictment, a juror may not testify as to any matter or statement occurring during the jury's deliberations, or on any juror's mind or emotions or mental processes, as influencing any juror's assent to or dissent from the verdict or indictment. Nor may a juror's affidavit or any statement by a juror concerning any matter about which the juror would be precluded from testifying be admitted in evidence for any of these purposes. However, a juror may testify: (1) whether any outside influence was improperly brought to bear upon any juror; or (2) to rebut a claim that the juror was not qualified to serve.

[salib]

7. However, that is not the claim

At least how I read this, the defense is wanting to obtain testimony based upon the idea that the prosecution "shopped around" for a sympathetic jury. That is NOT "outside influence", nor is it a "claim that the juror was not qualified to serve." I do not believe that have anything solid. I think it is smoke an mirrors.

[salib]

8. Maybe to add even more

The obvious requirement is that the juror is defending either his/her independence or qualifications. Perhaps some juror will come forward with that issue, but I believe that would be necessary. I do not see anything that says they can be "compelled."

[AlCzervik]

9. why? So he can go through it and figure out some elaborate lies to

cover his criminal ass.

[Miss Chybil]

10. So, he can't win at trial so he's going to try to kill the indictment?

Poleez.

[sofa king]

11. It's a form of intimidation, too.

Grand juries are supposed to be kept as confidential as possible. One of the things DeLay is looking for is a chance to reach out and touch the jurors themselves, perhaps in the long-shot hope that a future grand jury will be intimidated, perhaps because by leaning on them and their families he hopes some will testify in his favor, perhaps just because he is a vengeful and vindictive person by nature.

That list of jurors will get out to the right people. There will be calls in the night... threats. This is DeLay's way.

[0007]

12. I've always had deep suspicions about Cliff Baxter's death

and with DeLay living so close in Sugarland

[laylah]

19. That's it! Baxter!

I have been trying to remember his name for a few days now! I, too, have always been suspicious of his death! Will we ever TRULY know?

Jenn

[Mike_The_Computer]

13. DeLay's lawyer should just go ahead and subpoena everyone to testify.

Bring ALL of us in, all eleventy-billion of us, to testify. Hiding somewhere in this teeming mass of humanity lurks just the right lie, the perfect evasion, the cloudiest obfuscation that will set this gangster swine free of all charges, once and for all, forever.

[wicket]

14. kick

:kick:

[DemonFighterLives]

15. Earle is not on trial here and neither are the Jurors

Somehow Delay and his crack team need to be reminded who is on trial.
At least dubby loves him. eh, eh

[joeunderdog]

17. The OJ defense was to put the legal system on trial.

If they allow attorneys to do that again, they might as well close down shop.

[savemefromdumbya]

16. Delay should surrender

[liberalnurse]

18. Oh, it sounds like they

just called up the ghost of Luka Bratzzi from the Godfather to clean things up.....:scared: