"The first one being just sheer competence or, as the case may be, incompetence. And yesterday's hearing, I think, shows us one example of that - this failure to have the full grand jury vote on the revised indictment. The second category I think I would put under the category of bad motives, bad intent. And that would go to the selective and vindictive prosecution argument, which was also on the table yesterday."
"And it's important to note, with all these different motions to dismiss that are on the table right now, all James Comey's defense team has to do is win on any one of them, and the case gets dismissed. So it does feel to me like this case is really coming apart at the seams. I do. I mean, it's important to understand those arguments do get raised by defendants quite frequently."
Government errors in the case against James Comey fall into two main types: procedural incompetence and questionable prosecutorial motives. A clear procedural failing was not securing a full grand jury vote on the revised indictment. Claims of selective and vindictive prosecution allege improper intent or personal animus by decisionmakers. Comey's defense can obtain dismissal by prevailing on any single motion to dismiss, increasing dismissal prospects. Selective and vindictive claims are invoked often but have a high legal bar; defendants must show prosecution solely driven by animus or that similarly situated individuals were not pursued.
Read at www.npr.org
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]