Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Christie Crime Digest Volume III [View all]Laxman
(2,419 posts)71. Are The Rats Turning On Each Other....
or is there something else going on. I welcome your observations, analysis or conjecture. This just doesn't quite make sense to me.
GWB scandal: Baroni lawyers say prosecutors' request aimed at protecting Christie inner circle'
Attorneys for a former Christie aide who is facing federal criminal charges for allegedly closing lanes at the George Washington Bridge are fighting what they say is an attempt by prosecutors to keep evidence collected during the investigation secret before the trial.
Lawyers for former Port Authority deputy executive director Bill Baroni wrote in court papers that a proposal to limit disclosure of the evidence in the case prior to the trial would hamper their defense. They also wrote that it showed federal prosecutors desire to protect members of [Governor Christie]s inner circle and other government officials.
The legal fight is over a previous request by the U.S. Attorneys Office to add an extra layer of privacy over nearly 1.5 million documents it must turn over to defense attorneys in preparation for the trial. Federal prosecutors say some of the documents contain sensitive and private information unrelated to the bridge charges, and they have asked a judge to require that defense attorneys get approval from the judge before showing any of the documents to anyone else.
In court papers filed late Wednesday night, attorneys Michael Baldassare and Jennifer Mara wrote that there are already court rules in place that prohibit defense attorneys from unnecessarily disclosing sensitive information in the lead-up to a trial.
The case is being closely watched because it is progressing as Christie prepares to announce whether he will run for president and because prosecutors have said there are unindicted co-conspirators in the casepeople who investigators believe were involved but were not charged for some reason. After a nearly 16-month investigation, Baroni and former Christie deputy chief of staff Bridget Anne Kelly were charged for scheming to cause traffic jams in Fort Lee to get back at the boroughs mayor for not endorsing Christie for re-election in 2013. David Wildstein, a former Port Authority official who oversaw the lane closures, has pleaded guilty and is a witness against his two former colleagues.
Baronis attorneys wrote in a fiery 51-page document that the public interest in the case is reason not to grant the so-called protective order. They also criticized prosecutors argument that some of the documents, if disclosed, would embarrass people not involved in the alleged scheme and would fuel speculation about the identity of the unindicted co-conspirators. Such documents, regularly made available to defendants before trial, are called discovery.
Attorneys for a former Christie aide who is facing federal criminal charges for allegedly closing lanes at the George Washington Bridge are fighting what they say is an attempt by prosecutors to keep evidence collected during the investigation secret before the trial.
Lawyers for former Port Authority deputy executive director Bill Baroni wrote in court papers that a proposal to limit disclosure of the evidence in the case prior to the trial would hamper their defense. They also wrote that it showed federal prosecutors desire to protect members of [Governor Christie]s inner circle and other government officials.
The legal fight is over a previous request by the U.S. Attorneys Office to add an extra layer of privacy over nearly 1.5 million documents it must turn over to defense attorneys in preparation for the trial. Federal prosecutors say some of the documents contain sensitive and private information unrelated to the bridge charges, and they have asked a judge to require that defense attorneys get approval from the judge before showing any of the documents to anyone else.
In court papers filed late Wednesday night, attorneys Michael Baldassare and Jennifer Mara wrote that there are already court rules in place that prohibit defense attorneys from unnecessarily disclosing sensitive information in the lead-up to a trial.
The case is being closely watched because it is progressing as Christie prepares to announce whether he will run for president and because prosecutors have said there are unindicted co-conspirators in the casepeople who investigators believe were involved but were not charged for some reason. After a nearly 16-month investigation, Baroni and former Christie deputy chief of staff Bridget Anne Kelly were charged for scheming to cause traffic jams in Fort Lee to get back at the boroughs mayor for not endorsing Christie for re-election in 2013. David Wildstein, a former Port Authority official who oversaw the lane closures, has pleaded guilty and is a witness against his two former colleagues.
Baronis attorneys wrote in a fiery 51-page document that the public interest in the case is reason not to grant the so-called protective order. They also criticized prosecutors argument that some of the documents, if disclosed, would embarrass people not involved in the alleged scheme and would fuel speculation about the identity of the unindicted co-conspirators. Such documents, regularly made available to defendants before trial, are called discovery.
Are they really saying the U.S. Attorney is protecting Christie and his inner circle?
Read the rest here: http://www.northjersey.com/news/gwb-scandal-baroni-lawyers-say-prosecutors-request-aimed-at-protecting-christie-inner-circle-1.1354255
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
155 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I know what you mean.. There's been so much illegality in the christie admin and from christie
Cha
May 2015
#9
my first thought when I saw skinny Wildstein was "the people behind Christie radiation poisoned him"
Backwoodsrider
May 2015
#33
Also known as "Christie's Forty-Seven-Percent-Moment" (Good-natured jabs, my donkey)
rocktivity
May 2015
#50
Is Christie's publicly-financed self-exonerating Mastro report about to come back to haunt him?
rocktivity
Jun 2015
#56
You rock Laxman!!! While the non-memories of "Fitzmas" still hurt, I think this is different...
winstars
Jun 2015
#61
I have said all along, he will never get convicted of any crime. He seems to let others....
Logical
Jun 2015
#73
Christie's latest power failure: Another storm, another self-serving response
rocktivity
Jun 2015
#80
UPDATE: (Hillary Supporter) Jon Bon Jovi Says He Gave (Hillary Opponent) Christie Permission
rocktivity
Jun 2015
#85
Christie Confirms Bruce Is Still His Fave NJ Musician, Gets Ovation From Bruce's Fans
rocktivity
Aug 2015
#98
He's Being Funded By A Tabloid? That Explains Why He's Started Talking Like One
rocktivity
Aug 2015
#99
Didn't Christie just fantasize about beating a woman and then serving her with a subpoena?
rocktivity
Feb 2016
#138