No. of Recommendations: 4
Last night, House Republicans filed a brief to try to blow up the Hunter Biden plea deal with judge Maryellen Noreika, who serves on the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The judge, a Trump appointee, seemed skeptical of the deal -- which offered Hunter Biden broad immunity from prosecution.
Long story short, Hunter Biden pled "not guilty" but will change his plea if a new deal is struck. His attorneys said it would probably take a couple of weeks.
Interestingly, there has been chatter (which I mentioned in another thread) that the prosecution had discovered email evidence that made it doubt whether or not it could actually bring the case forward, evidence of violations of Hunter Biden's Sixth Amendment rights. These emails evidently belong to one or both of the whistleblowers.
In this latest twist, a Brady discovery order went in requiring the prosecution to disclose any information favorable to the defense which, presumably, would also include emails discussing why the department of justice was concerned it could not charge Hunter.
And does that also mean that Hunter's attorneys can now ask about the laptop?
Again, perhaps albaby1 has thoughts.
In short, while it seems likely a plea deal will still be reached, wouldn't it be a hoot-and-a-half if House Republicans not only scuttled the plea deal but made it impossible to bring charges against Hunter Biden?
No. of Recommendations: 0
I'm wondering how the emails might effect 6th amendment rights. Haven't found a discussion yet.
No. of Recommendations: 0
Yes, I follow Emptywheel but can't say I understand all she talks about because some of it seems to require prior knowledge of events/things of which I'm unaware. :) For instance here
There's documentation in the case file that some part of the investigation ' potentially something Ziegler himself did! ' created what are probably Confrontation Clause problems for the case generally.
(The Confrontation Clause found in the Sixth Amendment provides that "in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right'to be confronted with the witnesses against him." The Clause was intended to prevent the conviction of a defendant upon written evidence (such as depositions or ex parte affidavits) without that defendant having an opportunity to face his or her accusers and to put their honesty and truthfulness to test before the jury.) Excerpt
This leads me to ask, "Exactly what went on that would interfere with Hunter Biden's ability to confront witnesses? I have no idea, but the fellow putting memos in the file means it's very highly possible - and I'm puzzled as to what it could be.
