(05-07-2018 06:28 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Judges shouldn’t be political or biased. He’s stepped way over bounds into judicial activism.

Gotta agree with Mach here. It's beyond the pale to ask a prosecutor to make all evidence against an accused available to him.















gawd I crack myself up sometimes.

(05-07-2018 06:14 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  It takes a special kind of stupid to lose a case where the defendant pleaded guilty.

Happens all the time when 'illegal' tactics were used.

For those of you who may have forgotten, you may remember that the Phoenix Office of the FBI was informed about Muslims taking flight lessons but not wanting to learn how to land. They sat on information that could have prevented 9/11. Anybody remember who the head of the FBI was at the time?

All types of speculation in the op. Embarrassing really. Is this going to be like another IG report? I’m sure this is the lead on Hannity TONIGHT!!!! Tune in

Let me clue you alt-righters in. If your “source” flue around the Russian troll bots be suspect. Then look into the MSM. If there is nothing on abc, cbs, or nbc hold in the reins. Again I think this is the outrage of the week. They are adding up.

Run it through this site. Quit being Putin’s *****.

https://dashboard.securingdemocracy.org

Mach you're making a Russian spectacle of yourself.

The contents of this message are hidden because Machiavelli is on your ignore list.

Withdrawing a guilty plea isn't so simple.

Government misconduct doesn't change the information provided in the colloquy.

(05-07-2018 09:24 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Withdrawing a guilty plea isn't so simple.

Government misconduct doesn't change the information provided in the colloquy.

I'm no lawyer. So can you elaborate? This sounds interesting.

(05-07-2018 09:27 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:24 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Withdrawing a guilty plea isn't so simple.

Government misconduct doesn't change the information provided in the colloquy.

I'm no lawyer. So can you elaborate? This sounds interesting.

When a person takes a plea there are usual questions which are asked during the exchange.

1) Has anybody given you anything or promised you anything?
2) Are you entering into the plea on your own?
3) Do you understand the rights you are giving up by entering into the agreement?
4) Do you understand you are giving up your right to a trial, have the prosecution prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, call witnesses in your own defense, confront your accuser, and most important the right to appeal?

Usually that is followed up by asking "what did you do?"

At that point an individual has to give an answer as to what they did sufficient to meet each and every element of the offense. "I got a rock and busted open the car door and took the radio."

Then the Judge will ask how a person wishes to plea. It's hard to go back after you have stated that.

Now, a person can enter into what is known as a Best Interest Plea, also known as an Alford Plea, in which a person does not admit guilt but basically says that with the weight of evidence against so strong and the punishment so severe that is is in their best interests to accept the punishment in the plea agreement.

If a person does that then the prosecution will generally read the facts off and ask the defendant to agree or disagree or counsel will state what he believes the State will be able to prove if it were to go to trial.

A smart judge will ask counsel is they wish to preserve any issues for appeal.

I don't know the particular with Flyn but I have not read anything that an Alford Plea was entered.

Under Fed. R. Crim. App. Rule 32 a person doesn't have the right to withdraw a plea without the Court's blessing.

(05-07-2018 09:24 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Withdrawing a guilty plea isn't so simple.

Government misconduct doesn't change the information provided in the colloquy.

It does now. Judge Emmett Sullivan is saying that you can NOT create a plea deal without turning over your evidence first. If you dont, the plea deal is allowed to be withdrawn.

(05-07-2018 09:01 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Let me clue you alt-righters in. If your “source” flue around the Russian troll bots be suspect. Then look into the MSM. If there is nothing on abc, cbs, or nbc hold in the reins. Again I think this is the outrage of the week. They are adding up.

Lol. The alt left fake news isn’t covering a transcript that is literally available to the public?? Oh I see—-it’s not an anti-Trump story. Well Mach—it’s like this—the alt left does not cover anything even remotely positive for Trump. It is what it is. They cover a fake story about Cohens phones being bugged and ignore Mueller taking azz whipping after azz whipping in court. Fake news lives.

(05-07-2018 09:40 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:24 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Withdrawing a guilty plea isn't so simple.

Government misconduct doesn't change the information provided in the colloquy.

It does now. Judge Emmett Sullivan is saying that you can NOT create a plea deal without turning over your evidence first. If you dont, the plea deal is allowed to be withdrawn.

That's rather meaningless.

You don't have an absolute right to all the information which the state can use against you, or more accurately knows about you. It is generally limited to that which is to be used directly at trial.

There are limits to discovery.

(05-07-2018 06:28 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Judges shouldn’t be political or biased. He’s stepped way over bounds into judicial activism.

Yes he did. That’s why he was removed and replaced by an unbiased judge, judge Sullivan.

(05-07-2018 09:35 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:27 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:24 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Withdrawing a guilty plea isn't so simple.

Government misconduct doesn't change the information provided in the colloquy.

I'm no lawyer. So can you elaborate? This sounds interesting.

When a person takes a plea there are usual questions which are asked during the exchange.

1) Has anybody given you anything or promised you anything?
2) Are you entering into the plea on your own?
3) Do you understand the rights you are giving up by entering into the agreement?
4) Do you understand you are giving up your right to a trial, have the prosecution prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, call witnesses in your own defense, confront your accuser, and most important the right to appeal?

Usually that is followed up by asking "what did you do?"

At that point an individual has to give an answer as to what they did sufficient to meet each and every element of the offense. "I got a rock and busted open the car door and took the radio."

Then the Judge will ask how a person wishes to plea. It's hard to go back after you have stated that.

Now, a person can enter into what is known as a Best Interest Plea, also known as an Alford Plea, in which a person does not admit guilt but basically says that with the weight of evidence against so strong and the punishment so severe that is is in their best interests to accept the punishment in the plea agreement.

If a person does that then the prosecution will generally read the facts off and ask the defendant to agree or disagree or counsel will state what he believes the State will be able to prove if it were to go to trial.

A smart judge will ask counsel is they wish to preserve any issues for appeal.

I don't know the particular with Flyn but I have not read anything that an Alford Plea was entered.

Under Fed. R. Crim. App. Rule 32 a person doesn't have the right to withdraw a plea without the Court's blessing.

“Without the courts blessing” should be key here.

(05-07-2018 09:51 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:35 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:27 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:24 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Withdrawing a guilty plea isn't so simple.

Government misconduct doesn't change the information provided in the colloquy.

I'm no lawyer. So can you elaborate? This sounds interesting.

When a person takes a plea there are usual questions which are asked during the exchange.

1) Has anybody given you anything or promised you anything?
2) Are you entering into the plea on your own?
3) Do you understand the rights you are giving up by entering into the agreement?
4) Do you understand you are giving up your right to a trial, have the prosecution prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, call witnesses in your own defense, confront your accuser, and most important the right to appeal?

Usually that is followed up by asking "what did you do?"

At that point an individual has to give an answer as to what they did sufficient to meet each and every element of the offense. "I got a rock and busted open the car door and took the radio."

Then the Judge will ask how a person wishes to plea. It's hard to go back after you have stated that.

Now, a person can enter into what is known as a Best Interest Plea, also known as an Alford Plea, in which a person does not admit guilt but basically says that with the weight of evidence against so strong and the punishment so severe that is is in their best interests to accept the punishment in the plea agreement.

If a person does that then the prosecution will generally read the facts off and ask the defendant to agree or disagree or counsel will state what he believes the State will be able to prove if it were to go to trial.

A smart judge will ask counsel is they wish to preserve any issues for appeal.

I don't know the particular with Flyn but I have not read anything that an Alford Plea was entered.

Under Fed. R. Crim. App. Rule 32 a person doesn't have the right to withdraw a plea without the Court's blessing.

“Without the courts blessing” should be key here.

Even with the Court's blessing information disclosed during the colloquy can be used against you.

(05-07-2018 09:41 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:40 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:24 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Withdrawing a guilty plea isn't so simple.

Government misconduct doesn't change the information provided in the colloquy.

It does now. Judge Emmett Sullivan is saying that you can NOT create a plea deal without turning over your evidence first. If you dont, the plea deal is allowed to be withdrawn.

That's rather meaningless.

You don't have an absolute right to all the information which the state can use against you, or more accurately knows about you. It is generally limited to that which is to be used directly at trial.

There are limits to discovery.

You have an absolute right as a defendant to any information that exonerates you. That information CAN NOT BE WITHHELD. That info certainly wouldnt be used at trial by the prosecution, but it doesnt matter. Also, any evidence of malfescence by the prosecution must be given over to the defense. (The fact the Strojk went to a party to meet with the original trial judge.)

And in this case, Emmet Sullivan has ruled that all evidence that benefits Flynn must be turned over, and any evidence not turned over must be turned over to the judge for his review.

(05-07-2018 10:05 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:41 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:40 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:24 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Withdrawing a guilty plea isn't so simple.

Government misconduct doesn't change the information provided in the colloquy.

It does now. Judge Emmett Sullivan is saying that you can NOT create a plea deal without turning over your evidence first. If you dont, the plea deal is allowed to be withdrawn.

That's rather meaningless.

You don't have an absolute right to all the information which the state can use against you, or more accurately knows about you. It is generally limited to that which is to be used directly at trial.

There are limits to discovery.

You have an absolute right as a defendant to any information that exonerates you. That information CAN NOT BE WITHHELD. That info certainly wouldnt be used at trial by the prosecution, but it doesnt matter. Also, any evidence of malfescence by the prosecution must be given over to the defense. (The fact the Strojk went to a party to meet with the original trial judge.)

And in this case, Emmet Sullivan has ruled that all evidence that benefits Flynn must be turned over, and any evidence not turned over must be turned over to the judge for his review.

There is a huge difference in what benefits you and evidence in general.

The situation as described doesn’t look like an automatic get out of jail free card.

Prosecutorial misconduct may not overcome damage Flyn has already done to himself by taking the plea.

(05-07-2018 10:05 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:41 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:40 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-07-2018 09:24 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Withdrawing a guilty plea isn't so simple.

Government misconduct doesn't change the information provided in the colloquy.

It does now. Judge Emmett Sullivan is saying that you can NOT create a plea deal without turning over your evidence first. If you dont, the plea deal is allowed to be withdrawn.

That's rather meaningless.

You don't have an absolute right to all the information which the state can use against you, or more accurately knows about you. It is generally limited to that which is to be used directly at trial.

There are limits to discovery.

You have an absolute right as a defendant to any information that exonerates you. That information CAN NOT BE WITHHELD. That info certainly wouldnt be used at trial by the prosecution, but it doesnt matter. Also, any evidence of malfescence by the prosecution must be given over to the defense. (The fact the Strojk went to a party to meet with the original trial judge.)

And in this case, Emmet Sullivan has ruled that all evidence that benefits Flynn must be turned over, and any evidence not turned over must be turned over to the judge for his review.

Something Mueller has been caught failing to disclose before in his career. Old habits die hard.