NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
In the aftermath of the nearby Dean pardons published by President Donald Trump On January 20 For all persons who persecuted in connection with the events of January 6, 2021, the loudest criticism always goes like that:
“President Trump released hundreds of dangerous criminals from prison, although they have committed or were convicted by juries or judges, including some who have been appointed by Trump himself.”
But it is fair to characterize anyone who in the criminal justice process in the Columbia district in the District of Columbia, if “criminals” have to do, to characterize, if there was no honest trial available to make a judgment about their guilt?
William Shipley: the constitutional reason why Trump is January. 6 Grace was justified
Of course there were tests. The defendants could put their fate into the hands of jury members who were perhaps picked from the most anti-Trump jury pool in the nation, or they could choose another option. They could ask for a “banking process”, where the judge – including some appointed by Republican presidents – would hear the evidence and represent judgments. That had to offer the chance of a fair trial, even if a jury court would never be honest, right?
In my 21 years as a federal public prosecutor, with dozens of criminal trials with a large number of federal drug trafficking to tax fraud, I never had a single case in which the suspect chose to bank process during a jury court. In the 12 years followed as a criminal lawyer – all in the federal court – I had never recommended a banking process to a client.
When the judges have heard evidence about what happened that day so often that they tell officers of justice to skip it, you have lost the advantage of a completely unbiased, neutral facts.
But when it comes to representing 6 January customers, I advised everything, except one to refrain from their sixth amendment on a jury court and to have their affairs decided by a federal court – regardless of which president appointed them. The only exception was a case in which the suspect had promised guilty and had made recordings under Ede to the judge who would have decided his case. After withdrawing his guilty plea, it seemed the better option to make a shot with a jury instead of trying to win the judge to whom he had already admitted his fault.
I did not try to determine the total number of bank tests in January -cases. The fact that there was at all was an anomaly. But I was far from only among defense lawyers who, knowing Washington, DC, jury Pool, advised bank tests for customers. And in the five banking processes I was involved in 2024, every court told the federal prosecutors to skip the proof of the ‘events of the day’. Their reason? They had often heard it before. Instead, public prosecutors were told that they had to be quickly ahead of evidence that is specific to the suspect.
Former President Donald J. Trump, left, and judge Tanya Chutkan. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File/United States Courts)
And that is why the bank tests were a double -edged sword. When the judges have heard evidence about what happened that day so often that they tell officers of justice to skip it, you have lost the advantage of a completely unbiased, neutral facts.
This brings me to the pointed and undisputed comments from various of the American court for the judges of the District of Columbia in the aftermath of the radical grace issued by President Trump. See if one of them sounds neutral or objective:
District court Beryl Howell“”No ‘national injustice’ occurred here, just as there was no outcome -determining election fraud in the 2020 presidential elections…. No ‘national reconciliation process’ can begin when poor losers, whose preferred candidate loses an election, are glorified to disturb a constitutionally compulsory procedure in the congress and do this with impunity.”
District court Colleen Kollar-Kotelly“”What happened that day is kept for the future by thousands of simultaneous videos, transcriptions of trials, jury judgment and judicial opinions that analyze and tell proof by a neutral lens…. Those records are unchangeable and represent the truth, regardless of how the events of January 6 are described by those loaded or their allies.”
District court Tanya Chutken“”No pardon can change the tragic truth of what happened on January 6, 2021…. The dismissal of this case cannot undo the “Rampage (who), more than 140 people have wounded and caused millions of dollars in damage.” … and it cannot recover the whimsical violation in the holy tradition of America of peaceful transition forces. “
District court Amy Berman Jackson“”(Being fired) In contrast to the manifest public interest in maintaining the rule of law…. (Police officers) are the Patriots. Patriotism is loyalty to the country and loyalty to the constitution – not loyalty to a single head of state…. No pen from a pen and no proclamation can change the facts of what took place on January 6, 2021. If others in public interest are not willing to risk their own power or popularity by calling lies when they hear them, the report of the procedure in this courthouse will be available for those looking for the truth. “
District court Paul Friedman“”The claim of the proclamation is actually incorrect. There has been no ‘serious national injustice…. “Although the court has granted the motion to dismiss, nor this dismissal, the dismissal orders issued by other judges of this court, nor the grace issued by the President, will undo the damage of the Uprising on January 6, 2021 Make the truth of what happens (ED) on that day …“
Click here for more the opinion of Fox News
Not all district judges saw the need to give their own opinion about the grace of Trump. But all had convicted the “events of the day” in the most strict language that you were conceivable in pretrial hearings, the display of judgments and pronunciation of sentences. Judge Emmet Sullivan even called a defendant a “terrorist” and commented on his “bad character” before the suspect once had the opportunity to present any form of defense.
The views of all judges in the Columbia district were well understood. Still, confronted with the same question, whether I am apart from the right to a jury court or our chances with the judges who had made the above views, I would give the same advice today that I was starting to give three years ago – give me a bench trial and let the judge decide. That is how biased the jury pool in Washington is.
Click here to get the Fox News app
When the critics of Trump’s Pardonen wrongly assume the honesty of the underlying beliefs, the actual absence of such fairness keeps a fatal blow to the legitimacy of their claims.
