Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)
6. Considering the defendant's non-response to the prosecutor's motion
Mon Jul 17, 2023, 04:15 PM
Jul 2023

The special prosecutor filed a motion to postpone Judge Cannon's proposed trial date in August, asking instead for trial beginning in December. The defendant's response simply asked for trial to begin sometime after January 1, 2025. As I recall, there wasn't a lot of detail from the defendant about why trial should be set that far out, and there wasn't a date certain requested. Today's order seems to be notice to the defendant and his attorneys that they'd better have their calendars with them tomorrow and be ready to discuss specific dates. I don't think "We can't go on that date because I have an early tee time" or "We can't go on that date, because I might want to have a rally in Sheboygan" are going to be acceptable excuses.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Judge Cannon notified Tru...»Reply #6