Comments on: Untying a Few Legal Knots http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/ Firedoglake weblog Thu, 26 Nov 2009 01:55:23 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: lemond54 http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10278 lemond54 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10278 <p>Nytimes has just posted at 10:14 Est Libby indicted, rove still under investigation.</p> Nytimes has just posted at 10:14 Est Libby indicted, rove still under investigation.

]]> By: daCascadian http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10279 daCascadian Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10279 <p>OtisisHungry >”…The 5th Amendment requires no one can be put to trial for a federal felony unless they’ve been charged by Indictment…”</p> <p>I`m just catching up after a day out in “The Real World” & am curious (and have NOT read the whole thread so forgive if this was brought up somewhere above)</p> <p>The 5th Amendment mentions both Indictment & a “presentment”</p> <p>I`m aware a “presentment” is action by a grand jury w/o a prosecutor (”on its own” so to speak)</p> <p>(I think)</p> <p>so how does that fit in with your statement I`ve quoted above ?</p> <p>Thanks in advance for any clarification/reply</p> <p>“No place is so strongly fortified that money could not capture it.” - Marcus Tullius Cicero</p> OtisisHungry >”…The 5th Amendment requires no one can be put to trial for a federal felony unless they’ve been charged by Indictment…”

I`m just catching up after a day out in “The Real World” & am curious (and have NOT read the whole thread so forgive if this was brought up somewhere above)

The 5th Amendment mentions both Indictment & a “presentment”

I`m aware a “presentment” is action by a grand jury w/o a prosecutor (”on its own” so to speak)

(I think)

so how does that fit in with your statement I`ve quoted above ?

Thanks in advance for any clarification/reply

“No place is so strongly fortified that money could not capture it.” – Marcus Tullius Cicero

]]> By: ReddHedd http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10280 ReddHedd Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10280 <p>Could be, Thelema, if there were proof that he did some act in furtherance of the conspiracy.</p> Could be, Thelema, if there were proof that he did some act in furtherance of the conspiracy.

]]> By: Thelema http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10281 Thelema Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10281 <p>That would be <i>co-conspirator</i>.<br />My bad.</p> That would be co-conspirator.
My bad.

]]> By: Thelema http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10282 Thelema Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10282 <p><i>Grandpa — yup. If any one actor has done any act that is in furtherance of the conspiracy, whether or not he was a party to the whole conspiracy, he is open to indictment for (and conviction for) conspiracy. All it takes is one act — you give your buddies a ride to the bank, they go in and rob it. If you knew they were going in to rob it, or if you even suspected something was up and still took them there, you could be just as liable as the stick-up fellows. There is argument over your level of culpibility — and that would play out in court in terms of conviction or plea offers or sentencing guidelines reduction offers from the prosecutor, etc., but any one act is enough to tie you into the whole if you did something to help the conspiracy along.<br />ReddHedd | Homepage | 10.27.05 - 4:28 pm | # </i></p> <p>Under this point of law, if Bush knew his crew was in the process of outing Ms. Plame and did nothing to stop it, he would be a co-consirator. Is this correct?</p> Grandpa — yup. If any one actor has done any act that is in furtherance of the conspiracy, whether or not he was a party to the whole conspiracy, he is open to indictment for (and conviction for) conspiracy. All it takes is one act — you give your buddies a ride to the bank, they go in and rob it. If you knew they were going in to rob it, or if you even suspected something was up and still took them there, you could be just as liable as the stick-up fellows. There is argument over your level of culpibility — and that would play out in court in terms of conviction or plea offers or sentencing guidelines reduction offers from the prosecutor, etc., but any one act is enough to tie you into the whole if you did something to help the conspiracy along.
ReddHedd | Homepage | 10.27.05 – 4:28 pm | #

Under this point of law, if Bush knew his crew was in the process of outing Ms. Plame and did nothing to stop it, he would be a co-consirator. Is this correct?

]]> By: ReddHedd http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10283 ReddHedd Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10283 <p>Ooooh, Thanks Grampa. If that pans out, I’ve just won a bet. Woo hoo! (Hello, Fred Fleitz, John Bolton. I had your numbers. Mwahahahahaha.) Ahem. I mean…erm…hope there is some good sourcing on that one.</p> Ooooh, Thanks Grampa. If that pans out, I’ve just won a bet. Woo hoo! (Hello, Fred Fleitz, John Bolton. I had your numbers. Mwahahahahaha.) Ahem. I mean…erm…hope there is some good sourcing on that one.

]]> By: Grampa http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10284 Grampa Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10284 <p>THIS JUST IN:</p> <p>Richard Sale is reporting that Libby got his info about Plame from people under John Bolton at the State Department. Here is the link: <a href="http://turcopolier.typepad.com/">http://turcopolier.typepad.com/</a></p> THIS JUST IN:

Richard Sale is reporting that Libby got his info about Plame from people under John Bolton at the State Department. Here is the link: http://turcopolier.typepad.com/

]]> By: Valley Girl http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10285 Valley Girl Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10285 <p>ReddHedd,</p> <p>Thanks for the legal analysis you’ve been giving. I’m lapping it up. I’m very far from the legal profession in my own work, but find it a fascinating thing to watch such things play out. Heck, I even followed the Jackson trial blow by blow, because I thought that the judge was doing such a great job. I told a lawyer friend that I had been sure MJ would get off– but he had been persuaded not by Greta VS. Ha!</p> <p>Your pupil (me!) passed question 1, so your explanations are sticking… question 1 being Grampa’s about conspiracy. I thought to myself, well, according to what RH has said before, not everyone has to know everything in a conspiracy to be a conspirator.</p> <p>Thanks, and keep it up.<br />-</p> ReddHedd,

Thanks for the legal analysis you’ve been giving. I’m lapping it up. I’m very far from the legal profession in my own work, but find it a fascinating thing to watch such things play out. Heck, I even followed the Jackson trial blow by blow, because I thought that the judge was doing such a great job. I told a lawyer friend that I had been sure MJ would get off– but he had been persuaded not by Greta VS. Ha!

Your pupil (me!) passed question 1, so your explanations are sticking… question 1 being Grampa’s about conspiracy. I thought to myself, well, according to what RH has said before, not everyone has to know everything in a conspiracy to be a conspirator.

Thanks, and keep it up.
-

]]> By: Grampa http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10286 Grampa Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10286 <p>In other words, if there was a concerted plan to discredit Wilson by saying his trip was a boondoggle set up by his CIA wife, this could be a criminal conspiracy, provided anyone in the group knew Plame was under cover. What I’m trying to understand is how the “knowledge” element of that anti-outing statute applies. Everyone says this crime is so hard to prove (because, e.g., Rove didn’t know Plame was under cover), yet it would seem a conspiracy charge would be a lot easier to prove.</p> <p>Thanks for your great work.</p> In other words, if there was a concerted plan to discredit Wilson by saying his trip was a boondoggle set up by his CIA wife, this could be a criminal conspiracy, provided anyone in the group knew Plame was under cover. What I’m trying to understand is how the “knowledge” element of that anti-outing statute applies. Everyone says this crime is so hard to prove (because, e.g., Rove didn’t know Plame was under cover), yet it would seem a conspiracy charge would be a lot easier to prove.

Thanks for your great work.

]]> By: ReddHedd http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10287 ReddHedd Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2005/10/27/untying-a-few-legal-knots/#comment-10287 <p>Grandpa — yup. If any one actor has done any act that is in furtherance of the conspiracy, whether or not he was a party to the whole conspiracy, he is open to indictment for (and conviction for) conspiracy. All it takes is one act — you give your buddies a ride to the bank, they go in and rob it. If you knew they were going in to rob it, or if you even suspected something was up and still took them there, you could be just as liable as the stick-up fellows. There is argument over your level of culpibility — and that would play out in court in terms of conviction or plea offers or sentencing guidelines reduction offers from the prosecutor, etc., but any one act is enough to tie you into the whole if you did something to help the conspiracy along.</p> Grandpa — yup. If any one actor has done any act that is in furtherance of the conspiracy, whether or not he was a party to the whole conspiracy, he is open to indictment for (and conviction for) conspiracy. All it takes is one act — you give your buddies a ride to the bank, they go in and rob it. If you knew they were going in to rob it, or if you even suspected something was up and still took them there, you could be just as liable as the stick-up fellows. There is argument over your level of culpibility — and that would play out in court in terms of conviction or plea offers or sentencing guidelines reduction offers from the prosecutor, etc., but any one act is enough to tie you into the whole if you did something to help the conspiracy along.

]]>