- : http://BetsyDevine.weblogger.com
- : Heh. Well. Blogging since 2003 (at "Funny Ha-Ha or Funny Peculiar?") with the motto "Making trouble today for a better tomorrow."
-
US Attorneys tried to get Allen Raymond to testify about this NJ story at the NH phone-jamming trial of James Tobin. The defense quickly blocked them--puzzling, because the defense otherwise did all in its power to blacken Raymond's character.
Check out the relevant portion of the December 7 official transcript: http://betsydevine.weblogger.com/stories/storyRe
ader$2578Posted at January 10, 2006 7:49 AM in response to Raymond's Dirty Tricks - New Jersey Edition
-
Sorry, McAuliffe rebuked the defense on Tuesday, December 6.
I spent that day in court, blogging the action at http:betsydevine.weblogger.com
The Globe has now posted Beverley Wang's December 7 AP story: http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articl
es/2005/12/07/accounts_differ_on_tobins_role_in_phone_jamming_113
4004950/Posted at December 7, 2005 7:02 PM in response to Happenins' at the Tobin Trial
-
To clarify #5: The defense is trying to get around a very clear order from Judge McAuliffe's.
"McAuliffe said he will not allow Tobin’s attorneys to tell the jury what Raymond’s lawyer advised because, the judge said, it was irrelevant to Tobin’s actions." (http://unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline =Attorneys%20want%20no%20talk%20of%20RNC%20in%20phone%20trial& ;articleId=4e2006e0-c904-4523-8589-eb588dc39fb8 Union Leader, Dec. 3, 2005)
Despite Tobin's clear prohibition, the defense introduced this information in their opening statement on December 6, and clearly repeated it on December 7. They have now enjoyed two refreshing bites from that forbidden apple. I hope McCauliffe will push back harder on this. He did offer a very mild rebuke on Wednesday, after the jury had gone.
The defense spent much of the long pre-trial period trying to claim the phone barrage was legal, by stretching far into suspended disbelief about what our federal laws are meant to prohibit. If Raymond's lawyer told him the scheme was "legal", he must have been dredging up similar longshot theories.
That's why the defense is tap-dancing around an assertion, instead sending out repeated, subtle hints that a lawyer assured people their plan was "legal."
Posted at December 7, 2005 6:20 PM in response to Happenins' at the Tobin Trial
