DeLay Lawyers Say Judge Should Be Removed

Status
Not open for further replies.

Desertdog

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
1,980
Location
Ridgecrest Ca
Story location: http://wireservice.wired.com/wired/story.asp?section=Breaking&storyId=1110307

DeLay Lawyers Say Judge Should Be Removed
By APRIL CASTRO Associated Press Writer


AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- Attorneys for Republican U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay told a judge Tuesday that a Democratic jurist should be removed from DeLay's criminal trial to avoid an appearance of bias.

DeLay, the former House Majority leader accused of money laundering and conspiracy in a campaign finance scheme, contends state District Judge Bob Perkins cannot give him a fair trial because the judge has given money to Democratic candidates and causes.

Since judges are elected in Texas, they can contribute to candidates and political parties. DeLay's attorney Dick DeGuerin said no one contends Perkins did anything wrong, but "to protect the integrity" of the judicial system Perkins should not preside over a trial for someone to whom he is opposed politically.

DeGuerin said DeLay helped increase the GOP's numbers in the Texas Legislature and Congress at a time that Perkins was making contributions to help Democrats.

"The public perception of Judge Perkins' activities shows him to be on opposite sides of the political fence than Tom DeLay," DeGuerin said in an opening statement before Judge C.W. Duncan, who could decide as early as Tuesday if Perkins may stay on the case.

Prosecutor Rick Reed countered that DeLay's attorneys must prove, not speculate, that a member of the public would have a "reasonable doubt that the judge is impartial" in order to get Perkins removed from the case.

"Judges are presumed to be impartial," Reed said.

Perkins has declined to recuse himself from the DeLay case. He voluntarily stepped aside in a 1994 case against Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, who also was represented by DeGuerin. Perkins had made a contribution to Hutchison's political opponent. Hutchison was acquitted of misconduct charges.

DeLay smiled as he walked past journalists outside the hearing room but didn't speak.

DeLay was forced to step down as House Majority leader after he was charged with criminal conspiracy and money laundering in an alleged campaign finance scheme to help put more Republicans in the Texas House and Congress.

DeLay's attorneys subpoenaed Perkins to testify but the judge filed a motion to avoid testifying. Perkins argued that his participation in the proceedings would threaten "public confidence in the integrity and the impartiality of the judiciary."

DeLay's attorneys cited 34 political contributions Perkins has made to Democrats since 2000, including donations to MoveOn.org, a liberal advocacy group that has waged a campaign against DeLay.

Perkins has said that his contributions to MoveOn.org were made before it launched its anti-DeLay campaign. Prosecutors also argue that six of the contributions were wrongly counted twice by DeLay's attorneys.

DeLay and his associates are accused of funneling corporate donations through Texans for a Republican Majority, a political action committee founded by DeLay, to an arm of the Republican National Committee, which sent it back to seven GOP candidates running for the Texas Legislature in 2002. Texas law prohibits corporate money from being used directly in political campaigns.

___

Associated Press writers Kelley Shannon and Liz Austin contributed to this report.
 
The New York Times reports that the judge has been yanked off the case.
 
Yanked? No just removed at the order of the courts which is pretty much the same thing.

IMO, this is horrible and the president that this will set is just g*d awful. There is no argument against the removed judge other than he had donated to a Democrat org in the past. And not having the judge that ruled for dismissal publish an opinion is even worse. I want to see what legal justification was used for the removal.

Just think, in the future, we can argue that trials are not fair because our judge happened to belong to the wrong political party. :cuss:
 
MrTuffPaws
There is no argument against the removed judge other than he had donated to a Democrat org in the past.
From story
but "to protect the integrity" of the judicial system Perkins should not preside over a trial for someone to whom he is opposed politically.
From story
DeLay's attorneys cited 34 political contributions Perkins has made to Democrats since 2000, including donations to MoveOn.org, a liberal advocacy group that has waged a campaign against DeLay.

I would be a little suspicious.
 
The problem this now presents is who is really impartial towards Delay?

Apparently now the Prosecution can have any Republican judge who has made contributions to the Republican party removed on the grounds that the prior Democrat judge was considered impartial....

Doesn't this just open a can of worms?

The only way I see it now is to have both Democrat and Republican judges both preside, otherwise, we'll never see the end of the motions...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top