More News about the "NON-STORY" Regarding Tom DeLay

[bountyhunter]

Grand Jury Indicts Rep. Tom DeLay on New Money Laundering Charge on Heels of Conspiracy Charge

By APRIL CASTRO Associated Press Writer
The Associated Press

AUSTIN, Texas Oct 3, 2005 — A Texas grand jury indicted Rep. Tom DeLay on a new charge of money laundering Monday, less than a week after another grand jury leveled a conspiracy charge that forced DeLay to temporarily step down as House majority leader.

Both indictments accuse DeLay and two political associates of conspiring to get around a state ban on corporate campaign contributions by funneling the money through a political action committee to the Republican National Committee in Washington.

The RNC then sent back like amounts to distribute to Texas candidates in 2002, the indictment alleges.

The new indictment came hours after DeLay's attorneys filed a request to dismiss the case. That request argued that the conspiracy charge was based on a law that was not effective until 2003, the year after the alleged money transfers.

The judge who will preside in DeLay's case was out of the country on vacation and could not rule on the request. Other state district judges declined to rule on the request in his place, said Colleen Davis, a law clerk to Austin attorney Bill White, also represents DeLay.


Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1180945

 

[Preacherman]

An indictment is not a conviction. Let's see the evidence and see what the jury decides.

 

[bountyhunter]

An indictment is not a conviction. Let's see the evidence and see what the jury decides.

I already went on record as saying exactly that. I posted this because in another thread some forum members have already pronounced the DeLay/Frist affair to be a "non story" which is going to "blow away"..... and right after they posted that, DeLay got hit with a second indictment.

 

[El Tejon]

After reading that mess of a first indictment, I was wondering when Counts II and III would drop.

I would anticipate more charges based on II and III.

 

[roo_ster]

Earle is a wonder of perfidity

(For links, go to : http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=1950436&postcount=48 )

Wow. Just, "wow."

Earle is a full-service hack: partisanship, corruption, and incompetence all in one package.

Austin-American Statesman: Travis prosecutors pursued new charge to fix problem with last week's conspiracy count

Originally Posted by AAS

Last week a Travis County grand jury ended its term by indicting DeLay on a charge that accused him of conspiring to violate state campaign finance laws. The problem with that indictment, according to DeLay's lawyers, was that the conspiracy law did not apply to the election code in 2002. The Texas Legislature changed the law, which went into effect Sept. 1, 2003.

That left Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle and his assistants presenting a complicated case to a group of grand jurors on their first day of meeting.

Prosecutors hoped to fix the problem by reindicting DeLay on charges that he conspired to launder corporate money into political donations. In 2002, the conspiracy law applied to money laundering.

That "problem" being that the law Earle charged Delay with did not exist when the acts Earl alleges are illegal occurred. D'oh!

Delay Moves to Dismiss Charge; Earle Re-indicts Ham Sandwich
Quote:

Earlier today, Tom DeLay's lawyers moved to dismiss Ronnie Earle's conspiracy indictment on the ground that Texas's conspiracy statute had no application to the election laws until it was amended in 2003--subsequent to the 2002 election cycle that is the subject of the indictment. The Austin Statesman notes that the term of the grand jury that Earle used to indict DeLay expired last week, and the statute of limitation may have run in the meantime.

DeLay's lawyer, Dick DeGuerin, adds an interesting observation:

DeLay's lawyer Dick DeGuerin said "rumors are flying" that prosecutors were trying to find a sitting grand jury, who hadn't heard any of the DeLay case, to return a new money-laundering indictment.

As most of our readers probably know, grand jury proceedings are ex parte, which means that the DA has the grand jury all to himself. The target of an investigation, like DeLay, doesn't get to be represented by counsel and participate in the proceedings. Now that the indictment has been leveled, however, the playing field is even. DeLay gets to hire a lawyer--he's hired a very good one--and he gets equal time with the Court. It will be interesting to see what happens from here.

UPDATE: Sure enough, just a few minutes ago Earle got a new grand jury to indict DeLay on a new charge of "money laundering," which I assume we can take as an acknowledgement that the original charge can't stick. DeLay issued a statement in response to the new indictment:

Ronnie Earle has stooped to a new low with his brand of prosecutorial abuse. He is trying to pull the legal equivalent of a 'do-over' since he knows very well that the charges he brought against me last week are totally manufactured and illegitimate. This is an abomination of justice.

Sounds right to me. Earle may be routed again, as he was when he brought a specious indictment against Kay Hutchison. It helps a lot when you get to hire a lawyer and defend yourself, doesn't it?

ONE MORE THING: If I understand the news reports correctly, Earle just started scrambling around today, or at best within the last day or two, looking for a new grand jury with no prior knowledge of the DeLay matter. And he already had an indictment for "money laundering" by this afternoon? Unbelievable. If this is really correct, someone in Texas needs to take a hard look at their criminal justice system.

FINALLY, I PROMISE: The reprehensible Ronnie Earle admitted in a press conference on September 28 that he wasn't able to get a "money laundering" indictment out of the grand jury that had been sitting in this matter for goodness knows how many months. Now, in a matter of hours, he has gotten a brand new grand jury to return such an indictment--ex parte, with the grand jury hearing from no one but Earle and, presumably, a witness or two. It might be possible to imagine a more partisan, corrupt prosecutor than Ronnie Earle, but that's a thought experiment I'd rather not conduct.

OK, SO SUE ME: I can't resist a bit more from MSNBC's Abrams Report tonight--an interview with Dick DeGuerin, Tom DeLay's lawyer:

Abrams: Thanks for coming back on the program. I haven't even had a chance to look at this indictment. Tell me what it's about.

DeGuerin: I haven't seen it either, but I'll tell you what happened. Earlier today, a motion was filed that spelled out for Ronnie Earle in terms that even he could even understand that there is no such thing as a conspiracy to violate the Texas election code. So the original indictment doesn't charge a crime. So I guess this is his reaction that he had to rush back to the grand jury and charge some other crime.

Abrams: So you think literally, today, today, he went to a grand jury in the afternoon and got an indictment on money laundering that quickly?

DeGuerin: Apparently, after all the motions spelled out there's no conspiracy to violate the election code. It's just real clear, there's no such crime. So apparently in response to that, he rushed before another grand jury.

Abrams: And again, and and we've talked about this before, you appreciate how severe the allegation that you're making against the district attorney is. The notion that this district attorney went to a grand jury in response to you filing a legal motion and as a result, got a grand jury to indict your client is a very serious allegation.

DeGuerin: I think that's exactly what happened, Dan. And make no bones about it, if you look at what we filed, it's just clear as a bell. There's no conspiracy to violate the Texas election code. Ronnie Earle should have known that before they issued the first indictment, but this is apparently like a band-aid, some kind of patchwork to make up for the fact that they issued an indictment for something that's not a crime first.

Ouch. Here is the conclusion:

Abrams: Dick, how do you expect to be able to defend two different charges? Are you going to attack both in the same manner, meaning to basically allege, it sounds like you're doing now, that this is political.

DeGuerin: No, what I said to you, Dan, is the first charge just won't hold water. It is not a crime and it's astounding to me that a district attorney who's been in office for 27 years to get a grand jury to return an indictment for something that's not a crime. All he had to do was look at the books a little bit and he'd learn that. And I suppose that -- earlier today, his reaction was, I'll just go get another indictment for something else.

Abrams: All right. Well, Dick DeGuerin, thank you for coming on the program, talking about this as it's happening. We'll see if we can get more information on this. Let me publicly invite district attorney Ronnie Earle to come to the program. You heard Dick DeGuerin make some serious allegations. You are invited to come on the program and respond. Come on tomorrow whatever the case may be. We want to make sure we're being fair about this.

Will Ronnie Earle go on the radio to try to defend his abuse of power? Don't hold your breath. It is a scandal that he still holds a position of responsibility in Travis County. I know that ethics complaints, etc., have been filed against Earle for his misconduct, and an effort is underway to bar him from the practice of law. But the real solution is for the electorate to turn him out of office. The man is a disgrace to honest lawyers everywhere.

 

[El Tejon]

Wait a tick! jfuser, did I read that right? Are you saying Earle got an indictment for acts that were not crimes as the dates alleged? Got to review my Tejas criminal code no doubt.

Holy greased fasttrack to disbarment, Batman!

My Westlaw to me. Got to look that one up!

 

[Warbow]

Ouch. That's gotta be a bit embarrassing for Mr. Earle.

 

[Desertdog]

Ouch. That's gotta be a bit embarrassing for Mr. Earle.

Guys like that don't get embarrassed, they get mad and try something even stupider.

 

[LAR-15]

Another baseless charge.

You can always find suckers who hate Republicans in a liberal hippy towne and they will end up on the grand jury

 

[thorn726]

Right

but what i REAlly want to know is - did he cheat on his wife???
THAT would be worth investigating, i bet we could even get him to lie about it.
"mistake with a $190,000 check?" no problem- actually , i agree, this does seem a reach on the prosector's part.

In his radio comments on Tuesday, Mr. DeLay offered a new insight on the case, saying he made a mistake in a voluntary interview with the prosecutor's office a few weeks ago that helped prompt the indictments.

He would not discuss his mistake in detail, but it apparently concerned the $190,000 check that is central to the case. Mr. Earle charges that the money, which included money from corporate interests in Texas, was turned over to the Republican National Committee with instructions to return $190,000 to designated candidates for the Texas Legislature. The accusation is that the transaction was intended to circumvent a prohibition on the use of corporate money in state races.

"I misspoke one sentence, and they have based all of this on one sentence," Mr. DeLay told Mr. Limbaugh. "They think that before the check was cut and sent to the national committee that I approved this check. I didn't know this went on until well after it happened."

 

[Dannyboy]

After he screws the pooch again, I hope this guy gets fired or something. I think what this guy HAS done is much more of a story than what DeLay MAY have done.

http://www.statesman.com/metrostate/content/metro/stories/10/5earle.html
Prosecutor reveals third grand jury had refused DeLay indictment
Newly impaneled grand jury returned money-laundering charge within hours

By Laylan Copelin

AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

Tuesday, October 04, 2005

A Travis County grand jury last week refused to indict former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay as prosecutors raced to salvage their felony case against the Sugar Land Republican.

In a written statement Tuesday, Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle acknowledged that prosecutors presented their case to three grand juries — not just the two they had discussed — and one grand jury refused to indict DeLay. When questions arose about whether the state's conspiracy statute applied to the first indictment returned last Wednesday, prosecutors presented a new money-laundering charge to second grand jury on Friday because the term of the initial grand jury had expired.

Working on its last day Friday, the second grand jury refused to indict DeLay. Normally, a "no-bill" document is available at the courthouse after such a decision. No such document was released Tuesday.

Earle's statement on Tuesday said he took money-laundering and conspiracy charges to a third grand jury on Monday after prosecutors learned of new evidence over the weekend.

Lawyers for DeLay immediately called foul after Earle released his statement after 5 p.m. Tuesday.

"What could have happened over the weekend?" said Austin lawyer Bill White, who represents DeLay. "They investigate for three years and suddenly they have new evidence? That's beyond the pale!"

White suggested that Earle released his statement Tuesday because he feared reporters would learn about the no-bill.

In his statement, Earle said he would have no further comment because grand jury proceedings are secret.

DeLay's legal team, led by Houston lawyer Dick DeGuerin, has been taking to the airwaves to portray Earle as an incompetent prosecutor who is pursuing DeLay only as a political vendetta.

"It just gets worse and worse," DeGuerin said. "He's gone to three grand juries over four days. Where does it stop?"

The first grand jury, impaneled by state District Judge Mike Lynch, a Democrat, had spent six months hearing evidence that Republican groups had violated a state ban against spending corporate money in the 2002 campaigns, including the exchange of $190,000 of corporate money for the same amount of campaign donations from the Republican National Committee.

The grand jury indicted DeLay on charges of conspiring to violate the state election laws, a state-jail felony. As DeLay's lawyers waited to raise an issue whether the conspiracy law applied to the election code, prosecutors apparently learned of the issue.

According to Earle's Tuesday statement, prosecutors presented "some evidence" to a second grand jury impaneled by District Judge Julie Kocurek, a Republican, "out of an abundance of caution."

It's unclear whether those grand jurors refused to indict DeLay on money-laundering charges, a first-degree felony, because of the evidence or because it was given to them on the last day of their 90-day term.

Earle did not say in his statement what new evidence surfaced over the weekend. White, who said he doubts the evidence exists, challenged Earle to reveal it. Prosecutors also called Lynch's grand jurors over the weekend to poll them on how they would have voted on money-laundering charges if they had been given the chance.

Then prosecutors tried again Monday with a new grand jury.

When Monday's grand jury, impaneled by District Judge Brenda Kennedy, a Democrat, reported for its first day, Earle was there to ask them to indict the second most powerful Texan in Washington.

About four hours later, the new felony indictments were returned.

DeGuerin said he assumes Earle persuaded the third grand jury to act by telling them about the telephone poll of the grand jurors who had spent six months on the case.

"That's outrageous," DeGuerin said. "That's criminal."

 

[Yanus]

DeLay should go after him for "malicious prosecution". I would drag his ass in front of the bar and go after his license.

Yanus

 

[DonP]

"St. Ronnie the Martyr"

"DeLay should go after him for "malicious prosecution". I would drag his ass in front of the bar and go after his license."

To the lefties being disbarred and losing your license to practice law is a sign of great heroism. If/when Ronnie loses his license he'll be financed and run for governor or Senator from Texas.

Clinton lost his and he's still on the top of their charts as a hero figure.

 

[Yanus]

"St. Ronnie" isn't nearly as charismatic as Slick. Statewide, he couldn't get elected towel boy in a bordello.........

Yanus

 

[Pocket.38]

Delay is pure as the driven snow I'm sure

 

[bjbarron]

Delay is pure as the driven snow I'm sure

How do you tell a politician is lying?
His lips move.

None of these guys is pure, but 3 grand jurys...two within days of each other. If the third had said 'no' would there have been a fourth. If the case was so tight, why did it take 6 months for the first jury to bring charges...which turned out to be for a crime that hadn't been criminalized at the time of the crime....

After a while you've got to wonder about the prosecutor...keep changing the wording until something sticks.

Maybe Delay should have driven off a dock with a chick in the car.

 

[LAR-15]

Ha! Three grand juries to find one that would convict Delay.

Earle is a slimeball.

 

[bountyhunter]

DeLay should go after him for "malicious prosecution". I would drag his ass in front of the bar and go after his license.

Yanus

He has to beat the rap first, and secondly, he would have to prove there was no reasonable cause to believe he had not committed the crime.

You will find out double-quick if there is just cause to believe he committed a crime because his lawyers are asking the presiding judge to dismiss the charges on that grounds right now. If the judge says: "Gentlemen, the trial begins on Monday." it means there is sufficient cause and DeLay does not have a hope in hell of ever winning a malicious prosecution judgement.

 

[El Tejon]

Why would a guy like DeLay agree to speak with the prosecution? People like DeLay or Martha Stewart you think would have lawyers to stand there and say "NO!"

 

[LHB1]

As I understand the news, it was reported that reason for the second indictment was that the DA realized the first one would be thrown out as invalid. The grand jury's term had expired and a new grand jury started so that is why "a second grand jury" indicted DeLay on a "second charge". Whether he is guilty or not will be up to a judge and petit jury unless the second indictment is also flawed. In which case, I have no doubt the DA will look for still more indictments. At what point does this become legal harassment?

I am certain that ALL politicians are as pure as the driven snow but in my opinion diverting campaign funds to other candidates is not in the same league as murder, kidnapping, armed robbery, etc. I just wish the congress would stop wasting our money on glamour junkets and outrageous perks financed by the taxpayers.

Good shooting and be safe.
LB