tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3669412675139526125.post8406060990919515837..comments2024-03-12T21:13:06.850-05:00Comments on Legal Schnauzer: Mississippi Churning, Part Xlegalschnauzerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09619089628125964154noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3669412675139526125.post-82003536691010433662007-10-04T10:36:00.000-05:002007-10-04T10:36:00.000-05:00How could Justice Diaz have "ruled on Minor's case...How could Justice Diaz have "ruled on Minor's case," Tiny? When the court decisions clearly indicate him as "Not Participating"? <BR/><BR/>In other words: shush up, troll.gorjushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13184937227327518682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3669412675139526125.post-89677607758005400002007-09-29T17:46:00.000-05:002007-09-29T17:46:00.000-05:00"'Laws: We know what they are, and what they are w..."'Laws: We know what they are, and what they are worth! They are spider webs for the rich and mighty, steel chains for the poor and weak, fishing nets in the hands of the government.'<BR/><BR/>In a newspaper interview, juror Shirley Griffin confessed her bias against the government and that she had refused to consider the evidence, 'All that stuff the government brought back there was trash, all them boxes full of papers.' Griffin also defended her refusal to consider the government's case by saying she had made up her mind from the beginning that the defendants were not guilty, "From the first day, I could have taken that pad and wrote not guilty all the way down it." But Griffin took an oath to listen and consider the evidence and to rule without bias. She did not do that, which may have given reason for the other two jurors to refuse to honor their oath as well. If anyone wasted federal taxpayer dollars, it was Juror Griffin who should have never sat on this jury and Judge Wingate who should have removed or sanctioned any jurors who refused to honor their oath to uphold the law.<BR/><BR/>U. S. Attorney Dunn Lampton's claim that he was satisfied that the trial exposed corruption, even if it did not result in convictions, is not enough. The Justice Department must see that violators of federal laws are brought to account. I sincerely hope the department retries the remaining counts against Minor and Judges John Whitfield and Wes Teel. If it does not, every state justice system is at risk."Nancy Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09218399474906396857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3669412675139526125.post-91415484957584847852007-09-29T17:41:00.000-05:002007-09-29T17:41:00.000-05:00Diaz was being paid to be a state justice not a sp...Diaz was being paid to be a state justice not a spectator at this trial. He was suspended for three years while keeping his salary and benefits and while supporting Minor and the other judges. <BR/><BR/>By the way, nothing beats being there. Do not trust the transcripts or the news accounts to give you the real picture of what went on.Nancy Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09218399474906396857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3669412675139526125.post-75539234515180149752007-09-28T11:10:00.000-05:002007-09-28T11:10:00.000-05:00Bribery of judges is illegal in federal and state ...Bribery of judges is illegal in federal and state court. The question is: Was there really bribery or honest-services mail fraud in this case?<BR/><BR/>My research makes me think there wasn't. You evidently were at the trial, and there is value in that. But there also is value in conducting the research that I've done on the law, procedure etc.<BR/><BR/>Don't understand a couple of your points:<BR/><BR/>What was controversial about the first jury, as opposed to the second?<BR/><BR/><BR/>How did Diaz use taxpayer money to attend the trial? Not sure I get that.legalschnauzerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09619089628125964154noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3669412675139526125.post-11732894024088636972007-09-28T00:27:00.000-05:002007-09-28T00:27:00.000-05:00Tidy said... For one who was never there for a...Tidy said...<BR/><BR/> For one who was never there for a day of this investigation and trial you are rather smug in your assumptions. Of course Diaz ruled on Minor's case, but these were not a part of this case. Diaz took money from those in his court and Minor gave money, big money, truck loads of money to judges who were hearing his cases. This case was tried in federal court, where thankfully bribery of judges is illegal.<BR/><BR/> If Diaz had been facing this jury instead of the controversial jury in the first trial, he would have been found guilty with the rest of this scum.<BR/><BR/> And to the taxpayers, Diaz used your money (over $500,000 since this case began) to sit idle in the courtroom and to show up every day to in support of these criminals. He and his family daily hugged and back slapped, and yes, even spied on those considered "unfriendly." During trial, and during testimony, Mississippi justice Oliver Diaz passed notes to Minor (who had been convicted) and to his attorney.<BR/><BR/> Does not sound like the way a state justice should be behaving. But that is Mississippi justice for you. In Mississippi, not one of these criminals have been sanctioned by the Mississippi Bar nor the Commission on Judicial Performance. Injustice comes at a price the rest of us cannot afford.Nancy Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09218399474906396857noreply@blogger.com