newYou can listen to Fox’s news articles!
For all those indicted in connection with the events of January 6, 2021, in the aftermath of a nearby comprehensive pardon issued by President Donald Trump on January 20th, the biggest criticism is always like this It will become something.
“President Trump releases hundreds of dangerous offenders from prison, including those appointed by Trump himself, despite pleading guilty or being convicted by a jury or judge. did.”
But is it possible to characterize everyone involved in the District of Columbia criminal justice process as “criminals” if there was no fair process to reach a judgment about their guilt?
William Shipley: Constitutional reasons Trump will clean up in January. Six pardons have been justified
Certainly there was a trial. The defendants could put their fate in the hands of the ju umpire, perhaps the most anti-Trump judge pool in the country, allowing them to choose another option. They were able to seek a “bench trial” where judges, including some appointed by the Republican president, listen to the evidence and give a verdict. That’s what we had to offer a fair trial opportunity, even if the ju trial trial was never fair, right?
In my 21 years as a federal prosecutor, there has never been a single case in which defendants chose to bench trials in dozens of criminal trials, including countless federal crimes, from drug crowding to tax fraud. did. In the 12 years that continued as a criminal defense counsel, all in federal courts – I never recommended a bench trial to my clients.
When you hear that the judge orders the prosecutor to skip it because it happened again and again about what happened that day, you will be blessed with a completely fair and neutral fact finder. I lost it.
However, when I was to represent my client on January 6th, I advised all clients except to exempt them from the rights of the jury trial, regardless of which president appointed them; Their case was decided by a federal judge. One exception was when the defendant made an entry under oath to a judge who would have decided on his case. After retracting his guilty plea, taking a shot with the jury umpire rather than trying to beat a judge who already admitted his guilt seemed like a better option.
In the January 6th case, they are not attempting to determine the total number of bench trials. The fact that nothing happened was extraordinary. However, I was not far from advocate who knew the ju umpire pool in Washington, DC and recommended bench trials to clients. And in the five bench trials I was involved in in 2024, all judges told federal prosecutors to skip evidence of “events of the day.” What’s their reason? They’ve heard it many times. Instead, the prosecutor was told to fast-forward to evidence specific to the defendant.
Former President Donald J. Trump has left and Judge Tanya Chakkan. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File/US Court)
And that’s why the Bench Trial was a double-edged sword. When you hear that the judge orders the prosecutor to skip it because it happened again and again about what happened that day, you will be blessed with a completely fair and neutral fact finder. I lost it.
This brings me to the sharp, nonjudicial comments made by some of the US District Courts for District Judges of the District of Columbia in the aftermath of a massive amnesty issued by President Trump. Check if any of them sounds neutral or objective:
District Judge Beryl Howell: “Just as election fraud that determined the outcome of the 2020 presidential election did not occur, there was no “national fraud” here… The “national reconciliation process” does not begin when candidates who lose their elections disrupt constitutionally mandated lawsuits and the poor losers who do so with immunity are given glory.”
District Judge Colleen Colleen Coterry: “What happened that day is preserved for the future through thousands of contemporaneous videos, transcripts of trials, verdicts of jury, and judicial opinions analysing and speaking evidence through a neutral lens… These records are constant and represent the truth no matter how the events of January 6th are explained by the people and their allies.”
District Judge Tanya Chakken: “We cannot change the tragic truth of what happened on January 6th, 2021… Dismissal of this case cannot be cancelled “rampage” [that] Several people have died, more than 140 people have been injured, and millions of dollars have been damaged. …and we cannot repair the jagged violations of the American sacred tradition of peaceful transitions.. ”
District Judge Amy Berman Jackson: “[Dismissals are] Contrary to the public interest in supporting the rule of law… [Police Officers] I’m a patriot. Patriotism is loyalty to the nation and loyalty to the constitution, not loyalty to a single head of state… There is no stroke of the pen and the declaration cannot change the facts of what happened on January 6th, 2021. When others in the public eye don’t want to arouse their power or popularity by calling for lies when they hear them, this court minutes are available to those seeking the truth. It will be like that. ”
District Judge Paul Friedman: “The claims in the declaration are virtually incorrect. “There was no serious national fraud… “The court granted the motion for rejection, but this dismissal order issued by another judge in this court, or an amnesty issued by the President, was issued by the President. It will cancel the damage done by the rebels on January 6th, 2018. It will change the truth about what will happen[ed] On an infamous day…“
For more information about Fox News, click here
Not all district judges saw the need to offer their views on Trump’s pardon. But it all condemned “events of today” in the harshest language imaginable in the pretrial hearings, renderings of verdicts and statement declarations. Judge Emmett Sullivan called one defendant a “terrorist” and commented on his “bad personality” before defendant had the opportunity to present any kind of defense.
The views of all the judges in the District of Columbia were well understood. But facing the same question, I started giving three years ago whether to waive the right to a juice trial or take a chance with a judge who expressed the above opinion. I give the same advice – I will submit to the bench and have the judge decide. That’s how biased the ju umpire pool in Washington is.
Click here to get the Fox News app
When critics of Trump’s pardon falsely assume the fairness of fundamental beliefs, the actual absence of such fairness takes a fatal blow to the legitimacy of their claims.
