Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Latest On His Case From Don Siegelman - 'Motion For New Trial, 2nd Motion For Recusal Also Filed'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 11:44 PM
Original message
Latest On His Case From Don Siegelman - 'Motion For New Trial, 2nd Motion For Recusal Also Filed'
Dear -,

As many people have asked about the progress of my case, I’m writing to bring you up-to-date.

My Case was Vacated: As you may know, last month the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the judgment in my case and sent it back to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals “for further consideration” in light of the Skilling case. That case gutted the so-called “Honest Services” statute, under which I also was charged (along with bribery and obstruction of justice.)

My Case will go back to the Court of Appeals: We will have to wait to see what the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals does. My lawyers, including the lead lawyer, Sam Heldman, of Washington, DC, are hard at work preparing for briefing and oral argument for the Appeal. If you have questions regarding the meaning of the Supreme Court's decision please contact Sam Heldman.

A Motion for a NEW TRIAL was filed: Peter Sissman, also of Washington, DC, has filed a motion for a new trial on the grounds of multiple instances of government misconduct (due to Karl Rove's direction) that came to light after the trial.

A second Motion for RECUSAL was also filed: On June 29, Peter Sisman filed a second motion, this one for recusal, asking the trial judge to disqualify himself from the Siegelman case. The reason for this request is an April 2007 exparte - a back-room private meeting - the judge had with U.S. Marshals and Postal Inspectors in which they discussed matters which were pending before the judge in my case while keeping the meeting and what was discussed a secret from my lawyers until May 14, 2010, three years later!

This is illegal! Peter Sisman stated:

"The law required that the Trial Judge immediately inform defendants of any ex parte meeting. He failed to live up to his obligation. Here, the Trial Judge’s impartially can reasonably be questioned."

The Huffington Post has also published an article by Andrew Kreig providing further information about this here.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact Peter L. Sissman.

Thank you so much!

Don Siegelman
Governor of Alabama 1999-2003
"America's # 1 Political Prisoner", The American Trial Lawyer Magazine

http://www.donsiegelman.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 11:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. k and r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-10 01:25 AM
Response to Original message
2. We voted for change...why can't we at least have a new Department of Justice?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-10 02:01 AM
Response to Original message
3. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-10 02:11 AM
Response to Original message
4. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinboy3niner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-10 02:16 AM
Response to Original message
5. K&R
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-10 02:28 AM
Response to Original message
6. Kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-10 02:37 AM
Response to Original message
7. He is a political prisoner and it is very disappointing that
the DOJ has not taken up this case to look into the corruption that was behind this political prosecution. If they could do it for a Republican, they should give at least equal treatment to a Democrat.

And Karl Rove still roams free ... whatever happened to the subpoenas he refused to respond to? What happened to Leahy's committees, on Habeas Corpus, on Torture. Has all this been dropped? Did we make some kind of deal that if Democrats won, all investigations would end?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-10 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. I agree completely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ck4829 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-10 09:24 AM
Response to Original message
8. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC