LETTERS: It took 30 years; this is not hazing, it s training
gazette.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from gazette.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
but what anyone else get away with? this of course not. no one would get away with it. i know that judges, the two federal judges into state judges are trying to balance the fact that he s running for office, and whether this is political speech or not this isn t political speech or taits beach. it s s political violence speech. and you simply can t have it because don t front is gonna learn one thing sooner than later, and his lawyers are. to the criminal justice system and a federal judge a running his life right now, whether he believes it or not. he s going to find out that is sitting federal judge has a lot more power than he has despite him having 30 or 40% of maggots borders. here s what should happen. in order to violate a court order, the judges have to draft that order and tell him the political speech is one thing, but the administration of justice, attacking witnesses,
a couple of federal judges, and some state judges. so it is taking very seriously by the marshals. and, putting the names of grand jurors online, targeting jurors. i mean, that does hurt the, i can t help but believe that would hurt a person s willingness to serve on a. jury oh absolutely. when i found high criminal cases, i ve had anonymous juries. and you might remember, on the e. jean carroll case, the jury was anonymous, and remain anonymous. so, publishing the names of these grand jurors and their addresses, is a terrible thing, in my opinion. that s having them being anonymous, does it affect the trial in any way? well i think the jurors know, there must be a reason that their names aren t being given out. so, they are aware that it is certainly high profile. but they did it anyway, so i don t think it affects the justice process. in the fulton county case, the judge, as we were just showing, is relatively new to the bench. i mean, this is going to be an incredibly diff
threat against judge chutkan. judges have been threatened before. targeting a judge, having the former president, you know, talking about her and calling her racist, all sorts of things. when you hear that, i think so many people, this seems normal. should it be normal? it is certainly not normal for a judge to be threatened but not unheard of in high profile cases because there are people out there who are not mentally together. in any high profile case a judge can get threatening letters, threatening phone calls, and the u.s. marshals are very aware of that and they take care of that. unfortunately, there have been a couple judges who have actually been killed. a couple federal judges and some state judges so it is taken very seriously by the marshals. putting the names of grand jurors online, targeting jurors, that does hurt the i can t help but believe that would hurt a person s willingness to serve on a jury. absolutely.
vimarsana © 2020. All Rights Reserved.