re: Judge Sullivan asks judge to look at whether Flynn could be held in criminal contempt

quote:

---

So what now has changed?

---

The plaintiff admitted it’s prosecution was unethical

quote:

---

So what now has changed? I don’t see how Flynn and Van Grack can both come out of this unscathed. The two are mutually exclusive at this point and Sullivan seems like he’s sticking his boot up one of their asses.

---

First of all, if you think that Sullivan is going after Van
Grack you must suck as a lawyer bc you cannot infer anything. Judge S is now attempting to argue VanGs fricking case.

Second of all. As far as rule 11 goes, it requires you to withdraw a statement you realize is false, you know, like a guilty plea that was entered bc the Prosecution entrapped you and so your plea wasn’t knowing and voluntary??

Flynn has submitted evidence that his Plea was coerced. Thus. It’s not a valid plea, under the same logic that it wouldn’t be a valid civil contact, bc consent is vitiated by Duress. There’s no fricking Rule 11 violation based on the plea bc he’s attempted to withdraw it since the time he’s retained the brilliant Ms. Sidney. In fact if he HADNT moved to withdraw it, his conduct would be rule 11 sanctionable.

Moreover, as I understand it, the judge threatened to hold Flynn in contempt bc his lawyer filed an objection??? Lawyers are supposed to object.

Judge Sullivan should be defrocked if not disbarred for this shite.