DELAY TEST ON DELAY (hmmm, an interesting insight on Tom Delay's situation)

Nealz Nuze 10-06-05 ^ | 10/06/05 | Neal boortz

[rawhide]

(continued)...We learned yesterday that last Friday Ronnie Earle made what some people call a frantic attempt to get yet another grand jury to indict Delay on new charges; this after he learned that his first indictment was fatally flawed. The second grand jury returned what is called a "no-bill." That is, they refused to return an indictment. The procedure is for a no-bill to be made public the day it is returned. This didn't happen. It was returned last Friday, and only made public on Wednesday of this week. Some excuse is being floated about not finding a judge to sign it. So ... while this no-bill was sitting around waiting for a judge's signature, Earle rushes to yet another grand jury on Monday ,,, a brand-spanking new grand jury. He presents the same evidence to this grand jury that he gave to the grand jury on Friday. The new grand jury didn't know, however, that the Friday grand jury had refused to return an indictment. The no-bill, which should have been public by then, was mysteriously sitting around waiting for someone to find a judge with a pen. The new grand jury then returns an indictment for money laundering.

Draw your own conclusions.

Neal Boortz

[WOSG]

We learned yesterday that last Friday Ronnie Earle made what some people call a frantic attempt to get yet another grand jury to indict Delay on new charges; this after he learned that his first indictment was fatally flawed. The second grand jury returned what is called a "no-bill." That is, they refused to return an indictment. The procedure is for a no-bill to be made public the day it is returned. This didn't happen. It was returned last Friday, and only made public on Wednesday of this week. Some excuse is being floated about not finding a judge to sign it. So ... while this no-bill was sitting around waiting for a judge's signature, Earle rushes to yet another grand jury on Monday ,,, a brand-spanking new grand jury. He presents the same evidence to this grand jury that he gave to the grand jury on Friday. The new grand jury didn't know, however, that the Friday grand jury had refused to return an indictment. The no-bill, which should have been public by then, was mysteriously sitting around waiting for someone to find a judge with a pen. The new grand jury then returns an indictment for money laundering.

Draw your own conclusions. "

-------

Now that Tom Delay has stepped aside from his position of responsibility, pending the outcome of these allegations that Ronnie Earle has raised, will Ronnie Earle do the honorable thing and also step aside from his post, given his abuse of power, corrupt and highly disreputable behavior in this case?

[basil]

This is so yesterday! Rush was all over it.

I'm not much of a Boorz fan.

[HighlyOpinionated]

My own conclusion is that Ronnie Earle is a of the first order.

I would like say that I would like to see him here.

But I'm too much a genteel person to actually say such a thing.

[Torie]

What is elusive here is that the first grand jury did indict on the campaign finance law violation charge, and the second charge was on the same facts. I don't get it, unless there were THREE grand juries, but as I understand it, the first was dissolved on Friday, and the new one came in on Monday.

Color me puzzled.

[gusopol3]

the pillow is a nice touch

[Real Cynic No More]

The Austin populace who elected Earle should file charges with tht State Bar Association against him for negligence surrounding the first indictment. For him not to know that the law under which the initial indictment was brought was not in existence at the time of the alleged crime is at best gross negligence.

Ronnie Earle may have problems with the ads and with the fundraising tactics. He may abhor money in politics, but he is not a legislator empowered with making those laws. He has a sworn duty to uphold the laws as written, and when he tries to make laws he is overstepping his legal authority; in effect, he is breaking the law and violating his oath of office.

[expatpat]

There were three:

1. Returned the original indictment for conspiracy, which was suspect because it was alleged to have happened before the law was passed.

2. Refused to indict on money laundering.

3. Did indict on money laundering.

[Cicero]

Yes, according to news articles yesterday, there were three grand juries. There was the original one which brought in an indictment for conspiracy, a second one, which refused to indict, and a third one, hastily empanelled, which managed to indict for campaign finance fraud in a matter of four to six hours.

The first and third juries were empanelled by Democrat judges. The second was empanelled by a Republican judge.

[Torie]

Grand juries operate concurrently, and the DA can forum shop? That is very odd.

[Dog Gone]

There were three grand juries. The one last week ended its term on Wednesday and Earle got the indictment from them.

He then learned that DeLay was going to get the indictment quashed because it alleged a crime was committed in 2002 that wasn't a crime (even if true) until a 2003 law was passed.

That seems like a pretty basic flaw.

So, he then went to another grand jury that was still in session to re-indict DeLay on another charge--not conspiracy, but money-laundering--using the same facts.

That grand jury said no way.

Then after getting hammered on the Sunday talk shows, he empanelled a brand new grand jury under the order of a Democrat judge and got a new indictment on money-laundering even before the jurors knew each other's names or where the restroom was.

[jwalsh07]

Actually, according to Delays lawyer there have been 6. The first few declined to indict. Of the lat three one declined to indict and Ronnie Earle engaged in a conspiracy to keep that knowledge from the public view.

Ronnie Earle is in deep doodoo. From indicting a national figure for a crime that wasn't even on the books to shaking down corporations for his favorite charities and then conspiring to keep the no bill from public knowledge, Ronnie baby hads touched all the bases. Everybody knows it and if anybody had even thought about making a deal that thought is long gone. Delay and the PAC guys walk scott free, Earle is lucky to stay out of the hoosegow.

[Torie]

Thanks. As I say above, it seems odd.

[Torie]

So in the great state of Texas, a DA can just bounce from judge to judge, empaneling Grand juries, until one gets it "right" eh? It kind of reminds me of Louisiana.

[Torie]

Well Earle seems rather determined and reckless, but if he gets someone to finger DeLay with knowledge, he will have his way with DeLay. Apparently, Earle does not have that evidence now, and thus lacked probable cause. We don't do things that way in California, at least I don't think we do.

[KingKongCobra]

Here's an interesting question.

Friday Delay was no-billed but no judge signed.
Monday Delay is indicted.
Wednesday the no-bill is signed.

Q: Which becomes the active situation, the monday indict or the Wed no-bill?

This is going to be fun.

[Torie]

Another question is whether the Dem judge knew that Earle had already been before the GOP judge and his grand jury? One is supposed to disclose that sort of thing as a related matter in my neck of the woods, and the case is bounced to the judge who had it first. Granted that is on the civil side. Maybe on the criminal side, it is star chamber city as far as indictments go.

[jwalsh07]

Don;t you guys have an ethics thingamabob? Ya'll need a good mechanic. :-}

[Torie]

It IS interesting procedurally, very interesting, in fact fascinating. It also seems to raise certain Constitutinoal issues. Maybe it will get to SCOTUS. :)

[Torie]

Ya, it is called the legal canons of ethics, and it is statutory, in California. It is quite detailed.