Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Newest twist in Sen. Matt McCoy case

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Places » Iowa Donate to DU
 
Debi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 01:01 PM
Original message
Newest twist in Sen. Matt McCoy case
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007711140391

McCoy's lawyers attempt to have case thrown out

<snip>

Defense lawyers contend that two since-replaced prosecutors allowed witnesses to say things they knew were false and misled the grand jury with selectively edited audiotaped conversations. FBI Agent Kevin Kohler, questioned extensively about his grand jury testimony, defended a decision to play grand jurors only the tail end of a Dec. 21, 2005, conversation among Schultz, Vasquez and McCoy and a dispute over a demand for money.

According to courtroom discussion of Kohler's still-sealed testimony, the FBI agent told grand jurors that Vasquez and Schultz went to the meeting prepared to pay McCoy, but "the opportunity to make the payment did not present itself because of the way Mr. McCoy handled the meeting."

Defense lawyers say grand jurors did not hear the part of the tape where McCoy rejects a check from Schultz.They did, however, hear the end, which includes an expletive-laden conversation in which McCoy rails at Schultz after he and Vasquez are left alone."The grand jury certainly wouldn't have had time to listen to 12 hours of tapes, so we had to edit it," Kohler said Tuesday.

<snip>

Vasquez, who government officials now admit was paid for his work taping McCoy's conversations, acknowledged Tuesday that he failed to tell federal authorities until last month that he smoked marijuana during the period in which he tape-recorded McCoy's conversations.

<snip>

Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
1. Little doubt if this goes forward the the DoJ will be on trial
I would guess most everything they have done since 2005 is now up to question in every case they are prosecuting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Debi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-15-07 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. as it should be. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Places » Iowa Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC