Yea only burden of proof has nothing to do with number of votes needed to indict or convict . . . two totally different concepts.
Sure it does. The evidence means nothing if you can't get the juror's votes. The standard for grand jury is low, and indictment is not a finding of guilt - just that the case may (or may not) have merit. This is a political case. The venue was chosen to be the most unfriendly district in the state for Perry. This was done to have the best chance of getting at least 12 votes. The intent isn't necessarily to convict Perry, just to damage his political career going forward. Perry had nothing personal to gain from the veto, he was within his right to veto for any reason. If the voters are unhappy with him, they should recall him or not vote for him next time. Otherwise, he should do his job as he sees fit.
No, the burden of proof is a completely different concept than how many people you need to get to vote a criminal charge should be brought to get an indictment. Every time I challenge you on a statement to show you really don't know what you are talking about, you rattle a bunch of stuff and get off topic. When you say prosecution has unlimited funds, that is incorrect. And when you say burden of proof to indict is 12 votes out of 23 jurors. it tells me you don't really know what you are talking about. The other stuff you are saying may or may not be right, I don't know.
As they say, the devil is in the details. A governor can't "sell" his veto anymore than he can take bribes to perform/not perform any other official function. Did Perry offer to not veto the bill in exchange for some payment or favor? The definition of "bribes" is not limited to envelopes full of cash. At this point, we don't really have a clear picture of what Perry is accused of doing. It may be true that this is just another political pissing match....or Perry may have crossed a legal line.
The first part of your statement is the factual dispute at the heart of the case. As I just explained, the 2nd part of your statement is wrong. The exercise of the veto power is not exempt from laws governing bribery, extortion, and influence peddling.
Only for criminal cases. After my parents died, the evil legal system robbed my family of 1/3 of our inherited estate, and I could find no lawyer who would represent me. As for criminal cases, the public defender isn't free. The defendant is billed $1500 in Washington State. I don't know what it is in other states.
What is the standard for grand jury? Preponderance of the evidence. The defense doesn't get to present a case. The jury is large so you don't have to work as hard to convince each juror. Low standard. The case may or may not have merit. If the grand jury does not vote in favor of indictment, the standard is not met. In any case, this is a political move. The intent is to indict, not to administer justice. It doesn't matter what the standard is, the burden of proof is met by 12 votes and that's all the prosecution cares about. Not justice. http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=109 http://www.alancaplan.com/FAQ_1.html But you win, whatever it is you think you won.
http://www.kingcounty.gov/courts/OPD/Services/ProvideAttorney.aspx If you are found indigent, it means you cannot afford an attorney. You will be assigned to a public defense division. If you are found able to contribute, it means you have enough money that you cannot be found indigent, but you do not have enough money to hire a private attorney. You will be assigned to a public defense division, but you will be asked to sign a promissory note. The note means that you will make payments to help pay for your attorney. King County will send you a monthly bill, giving you up to 12 months to pay for your attorney.
I agree that the governor is not exempt from laws governing bribery, extortion, and influence peddling. Or murder or any other actual crime. What the news is reporting is that Perry was indicted for coercion: http://abc13.com/politics/texas-perry-indicted-for-coercion-for-veto-threat/264232/ A special prosecutor spent months calling witnesses and presenting evidence that Perry broke the law when he promised publicly to nix $7.5 million over two years for the public integrity unit, which is run by Travis County Democratic District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg's office. ... Grand jurors indicted Perry on abuse of official capacity, a first-degree felony with potential punishments of five to 99 years in prison, and coercion of a public servant, a third-degree felony that carries a punishment of two to 10 years. No one disputes that Perry is allowed to veto measures approved by the Legislature, including part or all of the state budget. But the left-leaning Texans for Public Justice government watchdog group filed an ethics complaint accusing the governor of coercion because he threatened to use his veto before actually doing so in an attempt to pressure Lehmberg to quit. ... Lehmberg oversees the office's public integrity unit, which investigates statewide allegations of corruption and political wrongdoing. Perry said he wouldn't allow Texas to fund the unit while Lehmberg remained in charge. Perry said Lehmberg, who is based in Austin, should resign after she was arrested and pleaded guilty to drunken driving in April 2013. A video recording made at the jail showed Lehmberg shouting at staffers to call the sheriff, kicking the door of her cell and sticking her tongue out.
You mention something that pisses a lot of people off. When someone gets charged with a crime, they are told if they can't afford one, one will be appointed to them (implying they will get one for free). But in the end, many have to pay fees for the court appointed attorney. I think the bigger injustice is that prosecutors are paid much better than public defenders. So you get better attorneys prosecuting cases than attorneys defending people who need public defenders. (If you can afford to hire a private attorney, than I think you often get an attorney better than prosecutors) Here in Oregon, the rate varies county to county but rate for public defenders is about $600 for simple felonies and $400 for misdemeanors. If convicted and put on probation, you pay it off in monthly installments unless a judge waives it. If I was charged with a crime, I wouldn't hesitate to retain a private attorney.
My research says Travis County grand juries have 12 jurors, not 23, and that 9 must vote to indict. Do you have some reason to believe the number was 23? barfo
Not clear what you are trying to say here. First and third degree felonies aren't 'actual crimes'? Too bad, the law disagrees with you. barfo
Right. He's also not being charged with eating a popsicle. That's also not a crime. In fact, there is a long list of things that aren't crimes that he isn't being indicted for. Still not clear what your point is. barfo
Governor getting indicted is a really big deal. It could all be politics, I think hard for any of us to say, imo, but the fact a governor is getting officially charged with crimes is huge. Probably good this will be hard for him to be the republican candidate in 2016. He used his power to try and force a District Attorney to resign. Weather this rose to a level of a crime we will find out in due time. But do you want a president who acts like this? And would he be a strong republican candidate given this history? There has to be better republican candidates than Rick Perry.
The "crime" doesn't matter. The indictment for any reason was the goal. They scoured the statutes until they found one that they could try to pin on him.
So the moral of the story is that, if you have enemies, maybe don't break any laws? Still not sure why "but they scoured the statutes until they found a law that there was evidence he broke" makes Perry a sympathetic figure.
I understand that many are questioning the indictment, and I can see why it looks politically motivated. But the fact remains Perry acted in manner that left him subject to bringing these charges against him. From the way he handled himself in the 2012 election and the way he is conducting himself as a governor, I think he lack the judgement to be a good president. i guess he could still overcome this to get the republican nomination, but is the republican party really that desperate? The governor pushed the envelope and got bit. I don't much care what happens with this in Texas, but why not get someone with better judgement to not put themselves in this position when it comes to being the president.
