tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25625654.post7424444066804125120..comments2023-12-23T03:49:20.907-08:00Comments on watchpaul: Grand Jury papers to be unsealed in Moore caseRosehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14023852057418281003noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25625654.post-88301933515062861432008-02-21T10:35:00.000-08:002008-02-21T10:35:00.000-08:00A prosecutor can state the legal basis for the pro...A prosecutor can state the legal basis for the prosecution in a public statement, and that's all that would be in the opening statement. I think the other poster is right. Bragg probably didn't expect the motion to be granted, but wanted to make the motion in order to frame the issue for the public.Eric V. Kirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14051840043550756893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25625654.post-36734237007074456462008-02-21T08:43:00.000-08:002008-02-21T08:43:00.000-08:00Eric, did you really say that? Or is someone who k...Eric, did you really say that? Or is someone who knows nothing about the ethical strictures on prosecutors regarding public statements in violation of a defendant's right to a fair trial posting in your name? On the other hand, I see your point. What is there to prevent PVG from going there?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25625654.post-82277623621485144142008-02-21T01:34:00.000-08:002008-02-21T01:34:00.000-08:00It's all about the front page. Apparently good or...It's all about the front page. Apparently good or bad, press is press.....right Britney? I mean Paul.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25625654.post-4999324425490565602008-02-20T21:29:00.000-08:002008-02-20T21:29:00.000-08:00If the first portion of the transcript is merely G...If the first portion of the transcript is merely Gallegos' argument, and that mere argument is going to prejudice the jury pool, what's to keep Gallegos from making the argument in a public forum? Or in his opening argument in trial?<BR/><BR/>I don't get it.Eric V. Kirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14051840043550756893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25625654.post-603774466550792172008-02-20T17:08:00.000-08:002008-02-20T17:08:00.000-08:00Sadly Chris, I agree with you. I wish it were dif...Sadly Chris, I agree with you. I wish it were different, but it is not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25625654.post-20090087092648214852008-02-20T16:06:00.000-08:002008-02-20T16:06:00.000-08:00The thing to look for in the transcript is whether...The thing to look for in the transcript is whether PG fairly represented both sides in a closed grand jury proceeding. <BR/><BR/>As I understand it, normal process is to file a criminal complaint and then have a preliminary hearing to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to go to trial. When choosing to go by way of grand jury, the DA is supposed to be prosecutor AND defender by fairly representing both sides of the issue since the other side is not there to defend themselves.<BR/><BR/>Besides which, how can a commanding officer second guess a police officer reacting to an on-the-spot threat in the line of duty?<BR/><BR/>I smell another in a long line of losing cases that began as a result of pursuing a personal agenda instead of representing the "people of the state of California."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25625654.post-6550423085669922042008-02-20T08:53:00.000-08:002008-02-20T08:53:00.000-08:00The question I have is if our local DA read and in...The question I have is if our local DA read and instruction for justifiable homicide by police. State law states that the shooting was justified if she threatened them with deadly force. If she pointed the gun at them, then they were justified in shooting her. If they were justified in shooting her, then there can be no criminal negligence in the homicide - because it is justifiable. If there is no criminal negligence in the shooting, then that extends to all parties. You can’t say the shooting was justified, but the call to go in which resulted in the shooting is somehow separate from the shooting.<BR/><BR/>But that requires some critical thinking and logic, which our illustrious DA doesn't have.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25625654.post-37985635251956708032008-02-20T08:03:00.000-08:002008-02-20T08:03:00.000-08:00The portion of the DA's comment on the law quoted ...The portion of the DA's comment on the law quoted in the posting is word for word accurate, as far as it goes. It is reasonable to assume that, unless and until Bragg and Co. show otherwise, that the DA read the so called "Calcrim"<BR/>instructions to the jury, which is the right thing to do.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com