Skip to comments.William Jefferson RAT-La trial about to enter final lap (defense is expected to last up to two days)
Posted on 07/17/2009 7:45:35 PM PDT by Libloather
William Jefferson trial about to enter final lap
by Jonathan Tilove and Bruce Alpert, The Times-Picayune
Friday July 17, 2009, 9:17 PM
ALEXANDRIA, VA. -- The end is in sight for the corruption trial of former Democratic Congressman William Jefferson.
After polling the jury, Ellis said that if testimony ends Wednesday, they would break until the following Tuesday, July 28. The break would enable the attorneys to prepare and for the court to resolve any remaining legal issues before the case goes to the jury.
'Explicit conflict of interest'
Friday's session began with testimony from Thomas Hardy, an official of the U.S. Trade and Development Agency, who said that in his eight years with the agency he had never seen a member of Congress take such a hands-on interest in a project as Jefferson did in a fertilizer project in Nigeria. Hardy said he did not know at the time that Jefferson's brother, Mose, had a financial interest in the effort.
Had he known, Hardy said, he would have reported it to the agency's general counsel as "an explicit conflict of interest, a congressman advocating for a project when he or his family had a financial stake."
The day ended with the appearance of Baton Rouge lobbyist James Creaghan, who was involved in several of the bribe schemes Jefferson is accused of, and appeared as a cooperating witness for the government in exchange for immunity from prosecution.
One of the first questions put to Creaghan, by Assistant U.S. Attorney Charles Duross, was whether he had ever paid bribes to Jefferson.
"Yes, " he replied. "Yes I did."
(Excerpt) Read more at nola.com ...
That's gonna leave a mark...
Please, please, make my day!
>> a fertilizer project in Nigeria
THAT was the cover? No sh!t? ROFLMAO! You can’t make this stuff up.
Now, whether or not he is convicted depends on whether he got a jury of his peers — or, alternatively, one made up of honest people.
“That’s gonna leave a mark... “
I doubt it . . . Jefferson is black . . . there’s a whole slew of different standards for those kind of criminals . . . OJ almost cut the heads off two white people, was covered with blood, and guilty as hell and was found innocent. I doubt if Jefferson will be found guilty. Two different standards of justice exist . . .
I am sure this is getting as much coverage as Ensign and Sanford, right?
>>OJ almost cut the heads off two white people, was covered with blood, and guilty as hell and was found innocent.<<
You were there? You saw all this? Then why the f&(% didn’t you notify the LA police department? Nobody else testified to any of that.
That jury, btw, had 2 whites and 1 hispanic, none of whom had any reason to find OJ not guilty unless they felt he didn’t do it or (most likely) the prosecution didn’t prove their case. The OJ case and this case have little in common.
You got that right: O.J.’s son was the guilty party not on trial, while William ‘cold cash’ Jefferson is the guilty party and he’s the one on trial.
“You were there? You saw all this? Then why the f&(% didnt you notify the LA police department? Nobody else testified to any of that.”
Wow! You were there? I’ll be darned. Didn’t know there were any witnesses. All I know is what was testified to . . . the DNA . . . the bloody glove . . . his background of extreme violence . . . the “cut” finger . . . etc. But you were there, huh?
No, I wasn’t there and I’m not the one claiming I know exactly what happened. You are. The DNA? OK, but it was all but unrefuted that there was cross contamination (i.e. mixing of blood samples) on the evidence. At worst, reasonable doubt. The bloody glove? Is this the same glove that didn’t have OJ’s blood on there in spite of a cut finger — allegedly cut at the crime scene? Plus it didn’t fit when he tried them on, and blood doesn’t shrink gloves, I’m sorry to say. Sweat doesn’t even shrink them. His background of extreme violence? Specifically what? Are you seriously resting your assurance of his guilt on this?
I have no idea what happened, but if he was as guilty as you say he was, this was a screw up big time by a set of keystone cops and prosecutors to match. They cared more about their reputation in being the people that put a celebrity behind bars then they cared about justice. This case screamed for reasonable doubt.
“Is this the same glove that didnt have OJs blood on there in spite of a cut finger allegedly cut at the crime scene? Plus it didnt fit when he tried them on, and blood doesnt shrink gloves, Im sorry to say. Sweat doesnt even shrink them.”
I hate to keep pounding on this topic, but anyone who still thinks OJ was innocent is kidding himself. Even OJ as much as admitted his guilt when he “authored” that book about “If I Had Done It” or whatever it was called.
The glove excuse is just plain stupid: OJ, in the courtroom (please look at the tapes), put on surgical gloves before he tried the glove on. And his attorney buddy had told him to stay off his arthritis meds for a week or so, so his joints would swell up . . . swollen joints + surgical gloves = glove wouldn’t fit. Even OJ was surprised when it didn’t fit.
Enough of this . . . he was guilty as hell and was exonerated by a bunch of morons. I lost all faith in the jury system during that trial . . . same as with Michael The Molester Jackson trial. TAH!