- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Judge Sullivan asks judge to look at whether Flynn could be held in criminal contempt
Posted on 5/13/20 at 10:05 pm to Wednesday
Posted on 5/13/20 at 10:05 pm to Wednesday
quote:
So how is his guilty plea subject to a Rule 11 charge if he’s already attempted to withdraw it. Rule 11 requires you to remove a statement that was later shown to be false. Flynn has actually COMPLIED with the rule the judge is “charging” him with contempt for violating
I don't know if criminal Rule 11 has the same safe harbor.
0
Posted on 5/13/20 at 10:06 pm to Wednesday
quote:
So how is his guilty plea subject to a Rule 11 charge if he’s already attempted to withdraw it. Rule 11 requires you to remove a statement that was later shown to be false. Flynn has actually COMPLIED with the rule the judge is “charging” him with contempt for violatin
Im pretty sure that‘s what Sullivan charged the new guy with briefing and addressing. I think we’re talking two different Rule 11s, one governs defendants pleading (fed rules crim pro) and the other attorney conduct (fed rules civ pro)
No comment on your quality as a lawyer, though
This post was edited on 5/13/20 at 10:08 pm
Posted on 5/13/20 at 10:06 pm to michael corleone
quote:
Isn’t there a “ best interest “ plea. Alford?
An Alford plea is where the defendant asserts innocence but concedes that the evidence would show him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It differs from nolo contendere in that in the latter the defendant isn't asserting innocence or guilt.
What Flynn could do is make a conditional plea, whereby he reserves his right to appeal parts of his case but waives all others. The defendant in Doggett did so while claiming he was denied a right to a speedy trial, which the SCOTUS agreed.
Posted on 5/13/20 at 10:08 pm to boosiebadazz
I stand corrected - but it still makes no sense to me that he’s trying to hold Flynn to an agreement that both sides have agreed is not valid
Posted on 5/13/20 at 10:12 pm to Wednesday
quote:
I stand corrected - but it still makes no sense to me that he’s trying to hold Flynn to an agreement that both sides have agreed is not valid
Which is why I don’t think he is. Flynn plead but then fought like hell to have it rescinded and actually put enough pressure on the government to have them drop it.
Those documents existed when Flynn plead. I think Sullivan wants to know what happened and with DOJ trying to bury it by dismissing it, this is Sullivan’s move to keep it viable and maintained and under his purview.
If he fricks Flynn after all of this I think an appellate court reverses with the quickness
Posted on 5/13/20 at 10:14 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
he other attorney conduct (fed rules civ pro
FRCivP Rule 11 applies to parties as well.
This post was edited on 5/13/20 at 10:17 pm
Posted on 5/13/20 at 10:28 pm to udtiger
Posted on 5/13/20 at 10:41 pm to Wednesday
quote:
You fricking Democrats and complaining about fundamental norms bc trump calls Schiff pencil neck. That’s not a fundamental norm. Permitting a legal version of a lynch mob to decide whether someone should be sentenced basically hasn’t been cool since Barabas
I really like this. Well done.
Posted on 5/13/20 at 11:05 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Those documents existed when Flynn plead. I think Sullivan wants to know what happened and with DOJ trying to bury it by dismissing it, this is Sullivan’s move to keep it viable and maintained and under his purview.
Right. But the DOJ has now changed its position. This is completely inappropriate and unfounded in the law.
Posted on 5/13/20 at 11:12 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
I think Sullivan wants to know what happened and with DOJ trying to bury it by dismissing it, this is Sullivan’s move to keep it viable and maintained and under his purview.
If this were the case, don’t you think the Judge would rule the prosecutors into court as well? He wouldnt have the other judge explore Flynn’s potential contempt/perjury Solely to get to the prosecutors’ actions- he would go to them directly. I think he wants his idea of justice given to Flynn in another form.
Posted on 5/14/20 at 12:09 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
If he fricks Flynn after all of this I think an appellate court reverses with the quickness
Before the election?
Posted on 5/14/20 at 12:12 am to boosiebadazz
I think you are correct. As I posted in Champagne’s thread a few minutes ago:
Trying to hold Flynn in contempt for perjury under these facts would necessarily require the court to find that Flynn lied to the court by telling the court, under oath, that he lied to the FBI.
In other words, the court would be trying to hold Flynn accountable for lying to the Court to plead guilty to a crime that he knew he did not commit (“lying to the FBI”)
This would turn criminal justice on its head. Sullivan would basically be finding that no criminal defendant who was the victim of prosecutorial misconduct could ever withdraw a coerced confession without committing perjury because deep down they always knew they were innocent - notwithstanding the bad acts of the prosecutors.
Trying to hold Flynn in contempt for perjury under these facts would necessarily require the court to find that Flynn lied to the court by telling the court, under oath, that he lied to the FBI.
In other words, the court would be trying to hold Flynn accountable for lying to the Court to plead guilty to a crime that he knew he did not commit (“lying to the FBI”)
This would turn criminal justice on its head. Sullivan would basically be finding that no criminal defendant who was the victim of prosecutorial misconduct could ever withdraw a coerced confession without committing perjury because deep down they always knew they were innocent - notwithstanding the bad acts of the prosecutors.
Posted on 5/14/20 at 2:33 am to John McClane
Victoria Toensing & Joe DiGenova were great on Seb Gorka Wednesday, and about Judge Sullivan's ridiculous antics.
Posted on 5/14/20 at 5:54 am to TOKEN
I am not deluded enough to think anyone evaluates my posts or positions enough to discern my POV - and I truly don’t care that much.
If one even bothered, they would note that I rarely offer analysis and prefer to snipe and jest from the gallery -and my reason for this is pretty simple:
I just believe that anyone who can’t see through the utter horse shite that has been propagated by the opposition to the current administration is not worth the effort.
This ‘Judge’ is just one more in a long, long line of jackals who would feed on their own offspring if it served their lust for power and control...
If one even bothered, they would note that I rarely offer analysis and prefer to snipe and jest from the gallery -and my reason for this is pretty simple:
I just believe that anyone who can’t see through the utter horse shite that has been propagated by the opposition to the current administration is not worth the effort.
This ‘Judge’ is just one more in a long, long line of jackals who would feed on their own offspring if it served their lust for power and control...
Posted on 5/14/20 at 6:03 am to Zachary
quote:
Did Flynn testify in some fashion during the proceeding?
when he entered his plea, they likely put him under oath and he had to admit to the underlying factual basis of the crime
it's unheard of to attempt to punish someone for entering a plea after that plea is found to be improper/illegal. our criminal justice system is literally built on people taking plea deals and this sort of behavior by the bench would destroy it all.
Posted on 5/14/20 at 6:04 am to Quidam65
quote:
So what happens if Flynn withdraws his plea? I know the Court isn't required to allow it, but if he withdraws it, and the prosecution is dropping charges, how in the world could the judge ACTUALLY try the case?
the judge can deny the withdrawal
so you'd have no reason to prosecute at that point. he'd just be sentenced (and obviously the judge wouldn't listen to the rec by the government)
Posted on 5/14/20 at 6:28 am to TheRoarRestoredInBR
quote:
Victoria Toensing & Joe DiGenova were great on Seb Gorka Wednesday, and about Judge Sullivan's ridiculous antics.
quote:
TheRoarRestoredInBR
Can you give a link? If that is too much trouble will you give a two or three sentence overview?
Posted on 5/14/20 at 6:52 am to TOKEN
quote:Incredible!
Judge Sullivan asks judge to look at whether Flynn could be held in criminal contempt
Flynn withdraws guilty plea copped under compromised counsel to a crap charge, and the Judge tries to stick him with a perjury charge for a false plea.
If John Grisham wrote that up in a legal novel, the work would be panned as impossible fiction.
This post was edited on 5/14/20 at 6:52 am
Posted on 5/14/20 at 6:59 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
"The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously last week against the improper use of amicus briefs by judges to shape a court case as they wish — which is what Judge Emmet G. Sullivan is doing, critics say, in the ongoing Michael Flynn case."
Page 7 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News