Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Limbaugh, prosecutors accuse each other of misleading court
Sun Sentinel ^ | 6/3/04 | JILL BARTON

Posted on 06/03/2004 7:33:13 PM PDT by wagglebee

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-30 last
To: wagglebee

"Its all on Rush's website"

DOH - Guess I just didn't expect it to be there -

Thanks... got it and will check it out...


21 posted on 06/05/2004 12:45:01 PM PDT by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Looked through both of them, and the thing that glared out at me was from Black's reply -
He says " Senator Gordon opposed the seizure of medical records by search warrant" , but Blacks following quote of the amended bill does not include ANY reference to a search warrant -

Are we supposed to assume that Sen. Gordon left it out but MEANT to include it simply beacuse Black says so ?

Perhaps Sen Gordon DID oppose seizure via search warrant - it dosen't matter since it was NOT included in the final bill that was passed.

... and since it was not mentioned in the exchange at all, how and why is the DA supposed to include it in his listing of discusions ?

Black is tossing confusion in the air and hoping it sticks...



My guess is that Sen Gordon is no longer with us, which gives an open opportunity to characterize his statements as being whatever one wishes.


22 posted on 06/05/2004 1:11:14 PM PDT by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: greasepaint

Good point, but I think the key here is -

"(d) In any civil or criminal action, "

an investigation is not any form of legal action


23 posted on 06/05/2004 1:33:45 PM PDT by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RS

I have no idea of how the Fla. supremes will rule,
but if the ruling goes against the state,
the state will get a subpoena.


24 posted on 06/05/2004 7:34:07 PM PDT by greasepaint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: greasepaint

"but if the ruling goes against the state,
the state will get a subpoena."

Black may have killed that path by suggesting that a "punishment" for the State would be that they could not subsequently issue a subpeona.

He's going for all the marbles...


25 posted on 06/05/2004 7:49:43 PM PDT by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: greasepaint; RS
if the ruling goes against the state, the state will get a subpoena.

If the court rules that the DA's office violated Florida staute in obtaining evidence, then I think it gets thrown out. The court would be saying an improper search and seizure occured.

The case would collapse.

26 posted on 06/05/2004 8:55:43 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: RS
(d) In any civil or criminal action,

an investigation is not any form of legal action

Did you mean criminal action rather than legal action? An investigation is a form of of legal action, and legal procedures must be followed in conducting it, right?

It seems to me that a criminal investigation is part of a criminal action, as is a criminal trial.

What do you think the term "criminal action" refers to?

27 posted on 06/05/2004 9:18:47 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

"What do you think the term "criminal action" refers to?"


The terms are specific legal terms - They refer to procedings - An investigation is not an "action"
This was touched on slightly in the hearing, and Black did a little word dance around it - it's about 20 minutes in.

( Didn't we go through this before, Ken H ? )


28 posted on 06/06/2004 9:15:45 AM PDT by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: RS
The terms are specific legal terms - They refer to procedings - An investigation is not an "action"

Then where would a subpoena and proper notification apply in a criminal action?

After the State seizes records by search warrant in the investigation, do they then have to obtain a subpoena and give proper notice for the pre-trial/trial phase?

(Didn't we go through this before, Ken H?)

Yes sir, we did. That was a while ago and I couldn't remember specifics.

Besides, I get smarter over time and make better arguments as I get older:)

29 posted on 06/06/2004 1:43:16 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

"Besides, I get smarter over time and make better arguments as I get older:)"

LOL - which of us is trying to catch up with the other ? :-)


30 posted on 06/07/2004 6:29:25 PM PDT by RS (Just because they're out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-30 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson