RSS Feed
Postville, IA - Rubashkin Scores Legal Victory as Charges are Severed |
|
| |
Published on:
Jun 25, 2009 at 06:16 PM
News Source: AP
Text Size
|
Advertisement:
U.S. District Judge Linda Reade issued her ruling today in the case against Agriprocessors Inc. and former company official Sholom Rubashkin.
Attorneys for the Postville company and Rubashkin argued that presenting all of the 142 charges at once would confuse a jury and make it difficult for the defendants to get a fair trial.
Reade agreed, saying it would be a monumental task for a jury to keep all the counts straight.
That means that prosecutors must try two cases, and that evidence from one trial may not be admissible in the other.
Guy Cook, an attorney for Rubashkin, calls Reade's ruling a major victory for his client.
More of today's headlines
“Jerusalem - In a move that pits him against the haredi rabbinical establishment and endears him to thousands of converts to Judaism, Chief Sephardi Rabbi Shlomo Amar...”
Jerusalem - Rabbi Amar Bars Rabbinic Judge From Conversion Cases
Los Angels, CA - Music Star Who Called Jews 'leeches' Dead.
Total25
Read Comments (25) — Post Yours »
1
Jun 25, 2009 at 06:48 PM Milhouse Says:
Boruch Hashem.
2
Jun 25, 2009 at 07:09 PM Anonymous Says:
good for him
3
Jun 25, 2009 at 06:50 PM Anonymous Says:
Observe - power of teffilah by the Kever of a Tzadik:
Today for the first time in months Rubashkin was personally able to Daven by the Rebbe's Ohel (on Gimmel Tammuz)
This same day the ruling came out to split the charges into separate cases!
4
Jun 25, 2009 at 07:40 PM Mordechai Says:
Baruch Hashem.
Our G-d is the True Judge, kind, compassionate, and loving.
5
Jun 25, 2009 at 07:32 PM Anonymous Says:
I don't see this as a victory. Govt now has 2 tries at conviction at a great expense for two trials to defendant. Now the Govt gets to hear defendant's defense at one trial and if the govt should lose they know what defense will argue. And, if at first trial defense loses, it becomes much more difficult to try the second case, especially while in prison if G-d forbid defense should lose the first trial. And as for confusing the jury, they will already be so confused when this whole thing starts, that it will be very difficult for defense to win. All we can do is pray for a good outcome.
6
Jun 25, 2009 at 07:51 PM shmuel Says:
Gimmul tamuz!! We will prevail!!
7
Jun 25, 2009 at 07:24 PM Anonymous Says:
“ Observe - power of teffilah by the Kever of a Tzadik:
Today for the first time in months Rubashkin was personally able to Daven by the Rebbe's Ohel (on Gimmel Tammuz)
This same day the ruling came out to split the charges into separate cases! ”
the last one was also lag bomer
8
Jun 25, 2009 at 07:56 PM Anonymous Says:
Most lawyers would not consider this a "victory". The prosecution will now have "two bites of the apple" and use the first trial to fine tune their arguments for the second. It also means that SMR will have to hang out longer waiting for the second trial to be completed.
9
Jun 25, 2009 at 07:20 PM Anonymous Says:
“ Observe - power of teffilah by the Kever of a Tzadik:
Today for the first time in months Rubashkin was personally able to Daven by the Rebbe's Ohel (on Gimmel Tammuz)
This same day the ruling came out to split the charges into separate cases! ”
If this court is, as any other court then the ruling would have been writing days ago and released today, so don’t over do it.
10
Jun 25, 2009 at 07:18 PM NYCbuff Says:
the Rubashkins are very nice and good people.. my family is very close to their family...they do not deserve to go thru what they are going thru...hashem will help you to the last minute all the way... -k-
11
Jun 25, 2009 at 07:16 PM hinge Says:
today is the rebbe's yurtzeit. so the tzadik helps him
12
Jun 25, 2009 at 08:16 PM Anonymous Says:
Reb Moshe, Chazak V'ematz!
13
Jun 25, 2009 at 08:04 PM Anonymous Says:
Sholem is ericher yid besides a lubavicher chossid
14
Jun 25, 2009 at 08:11 PM Anonymous Says:
“ I don't see this as a victory. Govt now has 2 tries at conviction at a great expense for two trials to defendant. Now the Govt gets to hear defendant's defense at one trial and if the govt should lose they know what defense will argue. And, if at first trial defense loses, it becomes much more difficult to try the second case, especially while in prison if G-d forbid defense should lose the first trial. And as for confusing the jury, they will already be so confused when this whole thing starts, that it will be very difficult for defense to win. All we can do is pray for a good outcome. ”
The 2 trials have nothing to do with each other. There is no fine tuning for the goverment, as the evidence and cases are not the same.
The Goverment will have to bend backwards in the second trial to avoid the word "illegal immigrant", as it may be a basis for mistrial.
15
Jun 25, 2009 at 08:05 PM Anonymous Says:
“ I don't see this as a victory. Govt now has 2 tries at conviction at a great expense for two trials to defendant. Now the Govt gets to hear defendant's defense at one trial and if the govt should lose they know what defense will argue. And, if at first trial defense loses, it becomes much more difficult to try the second case, especially while in prison if G-d forbid defense should lose the first trial. And as for confusing the jury, they will already be so confused when this whole thing starts, that it will be very difficult for defense to win. All we can do is pray for a good outcome. ”
No, the defenses are different since the charges and relevant facts will be different for each one. This is helpful to the defense.
16
Jun 25, 2009 at 09:25 PM yidden wake up Says:
we must daven to save this kitrug from us
17
Jun 25, 2009 at 09:40 PM Milhouse Says:
This is a major victory for the defense, because it enables him to testify in his own defense on the immigration charges, while reserving his right not to testify on the bank charges.
18
Jun 26, 2009 at 07:25 AM Litvak Says:
“ This is a major victory for the defense, because it enables him to testify in his own defense on the immigration charges, while reserving his right not to testify on the bank charges. ”
Why would he not want to testify on the bank charges? He has an obligation from the Torah to tell the truth, whether he was innocent or otherwise.
I would expect a person whom we trust for Kashrus to have higher moral standards than a thief, l'mashal. All this positioning with lawyers makes one feel that making him innocent is more important than the truth. Tell me - If he really did something wrong - would he lie and plead guilty or be a mench and tell the truth.
19
Jun 26, 2009 at 08:35 AM Oy Gevald Says:
Mazel Tov! May it be a source of Chizuk to all affected.
20
Jun 26, 2009 at 10:18 AM Anonymous Says:
“ If this court is, as any other court then the ruling would have been writing days ago and released today, so don’t over do it. ”
Had you been in Mitzraim during Makas Chosech you probably would have claimed that it didn't occur precisely at the stroke of midnight.
21
Jun 26, 2009 at 10:16 AM Dave Says:
This is certainly a victory for the defense, and certainly appears to be a reasonable ruling by the judge.
That being said, I would expect the bank charges to come to trial first. If he is convicted of bank fraud, that would potentially be useful in impeaching his testimony in the illegal immigration case. It wouldn't be admissible in and of itself, but it would preclude some categories of absolute statements by the defendant for fear of making the bank case admissible.
22
Jun 26, 2009 at 10:45 AM Anonymous Says:
“ Had you been in Mitzraim during Makas Chosech you probably would have claimed that it didn't occur precisely at the stroke of midnight. ”
Sorry that I pointed out how the system works and you don’t need to see a miracle in everything like the lahavdel goyin how they see artistic impressions even in a cheese sandwich
23
Jun 26, 2009 at 11:41 AM Milhouse Says:
“ Why would he not want to testify on the bank charges? He has an obligation from the Torah to tell the truth, whether he was innocent or otherwise.
I would expect a person whom we trust for Kashrus to have higher moral standards than a thief, l'mashal. All this positioning with lawyers makes one feel that making him innocent is more important than the truth. Tell me - If he really did something wrong - would he lie and plead guilty or be a mench and tell the truth.
”
Huh? He has an obligation from the Torah to testify? Since when? Where did you find such an obligation? Or did you just make it up?
He has the right not to testify, and if his lawyer thinks it will give him an advantage he will exercise that right, and you can't do anything about it, you rosho.
24
Jun 26, 2009 at 11:39 AM yossele Says:
Everytime this case is heard in COURT and not in the media, Rubashkin has a nitzachon.
25
Jul 17, 2009 at 12:22 PM javagame Says:
Very goood!!!