|
||||
Siegelman Released on Appeal Posted by Danny, on March 27th, 2008, at 4:34 pmFormer Gov. Don Siegelman is to be released on an appeal bond.
Read more: 33 comments to Siegelman Released on Appeal |
Daily Headlines, Saturday, 3/20/2010 Montgomery Advertiser – State’s gambling task force can resume Montgomery Advertiser – Ala. Democrats Bright, Davis to vote against health care bill Montgomery Advertiser – State briefs: Swine flu blamed in 6-year-old’s death Montgomery Advertiser – Court: Challenger rightful Evergreen mayor Montgomery Advertiser – Residents want vote on Pike [...] ChangeI wish my friend Hinton Mitchem godspeed and good luck after his retirement from public service. Hinton, on Monday, announced what many had suspected — he will not seek re-election. I remember meeting Hinton for the first time while I was a student at Auburn University. He served the people of his [...] Ten Minutes in the House, Senate Moves On Here is a quick preview of the upcoming week in Montgomery. This week will be a standard legislative schedule for the House. We will be in session on Tuesday and Thursday with committee meetings scheduled for Wednesday. Back in the Day... Tent City at Camp Sheridan near Montgomery, ca 1918 |
The Alabama Line is being updated and will return perhaps as soon as the first week of February. The Alabama Line and its contents are the creation of Doc’s Political Parlor, reflect consensus from insiders and well-connected folks on both sides of the aisle, and will be updated as conditions change. These odds are meant to inform, entertain, and provoke, not to serve as actual means for losing money. Permission granted to use this material if PoliticalParlor.net is cited as the source. |
||
|
Copyright © 2010 Doc's Political Parlor - All Rights Reserved |
||||
Legislative Dispatch
Purple Dot Connection
2010 Big List
2010 Senate Elections
2010 House Elections
Press Releases
“The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals said ……that his conviction ‘raised substantial questions of law or fact. ‘”
I wonder how the powers that be will spin this decision by one of the most conservative circuits in the country.
They will say he was convicted by a jury of his peers.
Why not release Scrushy, too? If there are questions about Siegelman’s conviction, surely that means there are questions about his co-defendent’s conviction.
This is really shameful. I think Don and Scrushy have been given way too much special treatment. They were both allowed to remain free for a year after a jury convicted them(common man gets sent to prison almost immediately) and here they are seven months after going to a minimum security prison(common man goes to max) about to be set free. You ever see these men on TV being set free after spending ten,twenty and sometimes thirty years in prison for crimes they didnt commit? Talk about a double standard…geesh. Common man has to wait decades before a court will even listen to him but the privileged somehow manage to get a court to immediately listen to their cries of innocence. Go figure and whats even more ironic is it was the democrats standing up for the privileged in this case. Whatever happened to Jim Juniors motto of “standing up for the little guy”?
This is a great day for Alabama and for justice!!!!! This should have been done a long time ago . . . but thank god for the 11th Circuit. They have shown real judgment thus far (and demonstrated that they can judge a case on the issues, not just the politics!).
Two Clinton appointees overrule a jury of the Don’s peers. Now a convicted Felon walks the streets, where your childern play.
I can only guess that many in Montgomery and Washington are a bit concerned. This is a bombshell when the most conservative circuit in the nation takes this track.
[...] Loretta Nall says the news is superb. Mooncat at Left in Alabama is happy. Danny is objective, as usual. The Alabama GOP also issued a press release: The Alabama Republican Party is disappointed in today’s ruling by the 11th Circuit Court and their decision to release former Governor Don Siegelman pending his appeal of the 6 counts of bribery and the 1 count of obstruction for which he was convicted. [...]
Lay off the crack, JD. This is the law. When you have substantive legal issues brought on appeal and you are neither a flight risk nor a danger to the community, you get released on appeal bond. They didn’t overrule a jury of Don’s peers, they granted the appeal bond which the law clearly states Judge Fuller should have granted immediately. Judge Fuller was completely out of line in not granting this bond to begin with, and if he had any professional integrity left he would be extremely embarassed today. As the AL GOP noted in its press release “it would be premature to turn this development into anything other than a formality”.
A formality which was the responsibility of Judge Fuller. Too bad he’s too much of a partisan hack to do his job.
And Willie, Nixon… this isn’t really a huge sign. This is standard procedure. That’s what so despicable about Fuller’s behavior: he ignored procedure and forced the Circuit Court of Appeals to step in an correct a mistake on an APPEAL BOND. If it weren’t transparent partisanship, this would look like dangerous incompetence.
Plus Scrushy is a flight risk, he proved that with his little trip on his boat that he was not allowed to take.
Don Siegelman will be exonerated eventually. Today was an important first step.
“Now a convicted Felon walks the streets, where your childern play.”
Good grief, JD. Over the top much? Scooter Libby is walking the streets too. Neither man is a danger to our children. You might want to carry around a paper bag in case you start hyperventilating again.
I hope the rubber meets the road on this issue soon. Whether or not Don was guilty of something, which many including myself have certain reservations, the manner in which this case was conducted smells a little odd. Did Fuller release the court transcripts yet? Honestly, that’s unacceptable if he hasn’t. If there’s nothing there, show us and let’s move on.
The funny thing about that is the argument against Don was for so long that “where there’s smoke there’s fire”. Well, there’e plenty of smoke surrounding this conviction. Let me also freely admit that Dana Jill doesn’t seem very credible. Although, the fact that Mike Hubbard couldn’t find her on any sign-up sheets doesn’t mean she wasn’t where she said she was. Do they really keep those? Rob Riley’s comments about her seem to leave something unsaid.
On a potentially impotent side note, I’ll argue that a “jury of his peers” is not what convicted Don. He was a former governor. Now I don’t necessarily consider them royalty, but there are certain responsibilities and such that differentiate the governor of a state from a civilian. Given the integral institutional knowledge that one develops and immense pressure that one endures while occupying the highest elected office of a state, it can be argued that a jury comprised of mere civilians is not one of former governor Don Siegelman’s peers. I casually make this argument considering the merits of his conviction…of which I consider there to be none. If I give you a big-ass contribution, I damn well expect to be appointed to something. Grand Marshall at Talladega in two weeks will do. Go Junior!
I can drink more beer than all of you p*&%ies!
dumb, ironically, is right. When the ruling says “substantial questions of law or fact,” it is not implying that the questions of law or fact being raised are so large as to warrant his leaving prison. What is being stated is that the questions being appealed, if found in Siegelman’s favor, could result in his conviction being overturned. This as opposed to appealing a question of law or fact that even if found in Siegelman’s favor would not result in his conviction being overturned. As far as the judicial system is concerned, which by the way is all that matters in this case, Don Siegelman is as guilty today as he was yesterday.
Fry Don
From the tales of the Don’s “good frind” Nick, he’s as much of a danger to childern as any other pervert
JD, I think you are going a bit far by implying that Don could be a pedophile. Also, Gunney, it came as a surprise to the Republicans in DeKalb county that Dana Jill was a Republican because she was never active in the local party.
JD, let’s not let the facts get in the way of good political hyperbole. For instance, in comment #6, you seem to blame the release on “Two Clinton appointees.” Let’s go the facts – straight from the 11th Circuit website. One of the judges, Susan Black, was appointed to the 11th Circuit in August of 1992. Wait, George Bush was President in 1992 – and was running against Clinton at the time, but I guess, for the sake of your argument, he appointed Judge Black as a favor to his Democratic opponent. The other judge, Stanley Marcus, was, in fact, appointed to the 11th Circuit by Clinton in 1997. However, in the intersts of fairness, I think it should be pointed out that he had previously served two years as a US Attorney and twelve years as a US District Court judge – both times appointed by -gasp- Ronald Reagan. But, again, maybe that was a holdover from the days when Reagan was a labor organizing Democrat back in the 30s and 40s.
As for dan t’s claim in comment #4 that this is shameful and that “Don and Scrushy have been given way too much special treatment. They were both allowed to remain free for a year after a jury convicted them(common man gets sent to prison almost immediately) and here they are seven months after going to a minimum security prison(common man goes to max) about to be set free.”, the fact really is that, except for VIOLENT crimes, sentencing reports take time before the judge actually determines how long the sentence will be. The convicted individual (again, except for VIOLENT offenders) traditionally stays free until such time. There was no SPECIAL treatment for Siegelman or Scrushy in the time before sentencing. In fact, as an attorney, the only SPECIAL treatment I have seen is the deplorable delay in the court system getting a transcript finalized so the appeal can be proceeded with one way or the other. That has been hashed and rehashed on this board before, and now that the new court reporter has gotten it finished, there is no real reason to revisit the particulars now, but I do find it amusing to see claims that Siegelman has somehow gotten preferential treatment, when a comparison of his situation to other white collar offenders would clearly show otherwise.
CAN SOMEONE PLEASE GET JD A DICTIONARY?!
Thanks Montgomery. Espcecially on the appointment stuff. Seems like JD is spinning this however he can . . . including fear mongering and lies. The same way they got this conviction in the first place.
Montgomery,
Nice work. I guess fact does usually trump fiction…except for my war stories. So there I was…
The 11th Circuit got the transcript Tuesday, two days later they release Siegelman. I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when that document hit Atlanta.
Here’s one I don’t understand. The state GOP is the first to claim that politics played no part in the prosecution, but the first to issue a press release on the topic when something doesn’t go its way. Rather confounding to me.
For instance the press release issued yesterday:
“The Alabama Republican Party is disappointed in today’s ruling by the 11th Circuit Court and their decision to release former Governor Don Siegelman pending his appeal of the 6 counts of bribery and the 1 count of obstruction for which he was convicted.”
Why is the party disappointed in the decision by the 11th circuit? Why does the party feel responsible to take up for the prosecution and rulings of Judge Fuller? Under the current federal rules, neither the prosecutors nor judge may maintain political affiliation, but the state GOP has no reservations about jumping out front and defending them. This is odd. Maybe nothing.
It would seem to me that any decent organization, political or otherwise, would not be disappointed if a judicial body found that there were SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW AND FACT raised in the prosecution of an individual. Albeit, this merely warrants a review of the case, but is still significant. Any decent individual/organization should have no problem with a federal circuit court giving the Siegelman prosecution a thorough review if in fact people who frequent this site and the state GOP are so confident that the prosecution was carried out in the proper manner.
The same thing occurred when cbs ran the story on 60 minutes, the state GOP worked itself into a lather over it and issued a couple press releases defending the conduct and decisions of the prosecutors and judge. Why does Hubbard feel like he has to defend these people? The far wiser approach would be to distance yourself and your party from the PURPORTED bad apples involved.
Just an observation from an otherwise uninformed, armchair political observer.
nixon – you are referring to PURPORTED bad apples, but yet we are dealing with a CONVICTED bad apple in Siegelman.
anonymous, Republicans were dealing with a convicted bad apple in Scooter Libby too. I don’t recall a great wailing and gnashing of teeth from the party when Bush commuted his sentence before he served a day in prison. Our legal system grants defendants the right to appeal their convictions. Does the Republican party want to take away that right? I certainly hope not.
Apparently a WRONGFULLY CONVICTED bad apple.
I hadn’t really thought of it that way Nixon, that’s a nice point. Why would they be disappointed?
Was this a Republican conviction?
Nixon, that was more than “a couple of press releases” on the 60 minutes piece. It was a flood of e-mails.
But I understand the response to the 60 minutes case… there the implication is that the Governor’s supporters plotted to take out the ex-governor in a dirty prosecution.
Here a three judge panel made a non-controversial ruling on a procedural issue. Hubbard should have kept his mouth shut.
Convictions are overturned everyday. Ask Scooter Libby.
Was Libby’s conviction overturned or did he receive a pardon?
Bottom Line, we may get some answers. Somebody ain’t tellin the truth. If it is Siegelman, he goes back to prison for a long time. If it is Rove, Canary et al don’t you think it is a good idea to find out if DOJ has been taken over by political hacks? And please, somebody tell Canary to take his hand out of Mike Hubbard’s back and quit destroying our party just to defend some two bit lobbyist (Canary).
After Bush commuted Libby’s sentence, Libby chose not to appeal his conviction.
Margaret,
What difference does it make if Scooter Libby’s conviction was overturned or he recieved a pardon?
Was Scooter Libby hauled off to jail in leg irons and shackels immediately after being found guilty by a jury of his peers?
Did Scooter Libby serve 9 months in prison?
This is what Barack Obama means when he says it’s the end of “Scooter Libby justice” and the beginning of “justice for all”.
pole totem, you are right about the bottom line, Somebody ain’t telling the truth. Thats fer sure.
is judge fullers’ middle name “Everett” ?