Tobin seeks dismissal of charges (GOP phone jamming)

[MaineDem]

CONCORD, N.H. --A former regional director for the Republican National Committee wants a federal court to dismiss charges that he conspired to jam phone lines set up to get voters to the polls in 2002.

Judge Steven McAuliffe has scheduled a hearing on Nov. 10 on James Tobin's request to dismiss a four-count indictment.

The hang-up calls overwhelmed the Democrats' get-out-the-vote phone banks and a ride-to-the-polls line for more than an hour on Election Day. Former state GOP director Chuck McGee and Republican consultant Allen Raymond pleaded guilty to taking part in the scheme. McGee was sentenced to seven months in prison and Raymond was sentenced to five months.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2005/10/25/tobin_seeks_dismissal_of_charges/?rss_id=Boston.com+%2F+News

No way this should be dismissed!

As an aside, I think the judge may be Krista McAuliffe's widower.

[ck4829]

1. You are right, that is her widower.

[Caution]

2. FWIW a call for dismissal is made in every criminal case that goes to

trial. I don't understand why the media reports on this.

[bunny planet]

6. It will be news if they succeed in getting the case dismissed and then you

can bet the media will not report it or report it as a victory and a vindication of the Repukes. Every single one of these cases that expose the 'culture of corruption' in the Republican party are important, and so many of them are tied in with each other. Who knows who else might crawl out from under a rock in this case or what other connections and criminal wrongdoing connected with it might be exposed.

[formercia]

3. It may be S.O.P. but an insult to the court none the less.

[happyslug]

7. IF your Attorney does NOT do it, you can NOT object to the Jury's Decision

In most states, thus if you want to file a verdict "Not withstanding the Verdict" and to appeal, you have to have first make a request to dismiss before the case goes to the Jury. Most Judges will rule against the Defendant on the simply expenditure that if there is insufficient evidence the Jury will ruled the Defendant "Not Guilty" thus the Judge does not have to take the heat of leaving a Criminal off on a legal technically (i.e. no evidence, remember being innocent can be a legal technically, but the mere fact you are innocent does not prevent you from serving your sentence if you were convicted by a Judge or Jury).

Now the Judge still has the problem if the Jury comes back with a Guilty Verdict (and most Juries want to convict). At that time Judge can dismiss the verdict as not being supported by the Evidence but only if the Attorney had made the motion to dismiss prior to the Jury being given the case. Thus you always see a motion to dismiss. Then that motion being denied. Any Judge knows it is easier to blame a Jury for leaving someone off than doing it yourself, even if it is clear that the Prosecution has NOT proved its case.

[formercia]

8. Good point. Even vermin get due process.

If they can afford it.

[happyslug]

9. This happend to a Judge in Allegheny County PA about 20 years ago

She had left the case go to the Jury and the Jury found the Defendant quitly but the Judge reversed the Verdict of the Jury on the grounds of the lack of evidence. The details of the case was a Collage Co-ed was working in her father's porno shop and had been murdered. The Jury found no problem convicting the person arrested with items from the shop but the Judge basicly ruled mere position of things from the Shop did not prove guilt.

Her decision caused an uproad in Pittsburgh. The fact that the victim was working in a Porno Shop when killed did not matter to the Jury or the Public (To many people had had problems finding a job to critize her working for her father in his business). The Judge kept her job but a lot of people till this day said he had a larger hang up on where the victim was working than anyone else in the County.

[zbdent]

4. Isn't there some sort of law on the books about that?

Either in the Telecommunications act, or the Patriot act . . .

[ShockediSay]

5. I think there should be a federal law against election obstruction

-by use of libelous statements (A Richardson was a lesbian; McCain's wife was institutionalized)etc

-by use of impeding votes (through voting machines, inadequate availability of voting)etc

-by use of dirty tricks (as defined)


AND these should be felonies.

[happyslug]

10. Violation of the First Amendment.

While I believe deliberate falsehoods should be punished I just like Paraphrasing a Journalist at the Scopes Monkey Trial who was covering the Trial about why he was typing his story without even waiting to see what happened that day (Paraphrase only), "I know what my Publisher wants me to write".

This cause problems on people's understanding of the Scopes Monkey Trial, the Press had been attacking William Jennings Bryan for 30 years by the time of the Trial. The reason for this is Bryan tended to support the little guy, he opposed big Business, he wanted the Government to help people in need etc. The Republicans who owned the papers opposed all of this, and never lost an opportunity to attack Bryan.

Thus Bryan had been and even into the 1930s subject to all types of attacks. What Bryan did stand for had been forgotten by the 1950s but the attacks were remembered. Thus Bryan, as portrayed by his enemies (Which did NOT include the ACLU and in many aspects Darrow) became the model of Brady in the play "Inherit the Wind". Furthermore the play distorted the facts of the Scopes case to make a better piece against McCarthyism. What Bryan did and did not do during the Scopes trial was forgotten for the slander against him had been remembered and the truth forgotten. The GOP has practiced this for over 100 years and it works just compared your perception of William Jennings Bryan and the Monkey trail with his ending comments to the court on the trial:


“I don’t know that there is any special reason why I should add to what has been said, and yet the subject has been presented from so many viewpoints that I hope the Court will pardon me if I mention a viewpoint that has not been referred to.....

“Causes stir the world, and this cause has stirred the world. It is because it goes deep. It is because it extends wide and because it reaches into the future beyond the power of man to see. Here has been fought out a little case of little consequence as a case, but the world is interested because it raises an issue, and that issue will some day be settled right, whether it is settled on our side or the other side. It is going to be settled right. There can be no settlement of a great cause without discussion, and people will not discuss a cause until their attention is drawn to it, and the value of this trial is not in any incident of the trial, it is not because of anybody who is attached to it, either in any official way or as counsel on either side.

“Human beings are mighty small, your Honor. We are apt to minify the personal element and we sometimes become inflated with our importance, but the world little cares for man as an individual. He is born, he works, he dies, but causes go on forever, and we who have participated in this case may congratulate ourselves that we have attached ourselves to a mighty issue.

“Now, if I were to attempt to define that issue I might find objection from the other side. Their definition of the issue might not be as mine is, and therefore, I will not take advantage of the privilege the Court gives me this morning to make a statement that might be controversial, and nothing that I would say would determine it.

“I have no power to define this issue finally and authoritatively. None of the counsel on our side has this power, and none of the counsel on the other side has this power. Even this honorable Court has no such power. The people will determine this issue. They will take sides upon this issue, they will state the questions involved in this issue, they will examine the information — not so much that which has been brought out here, but this case will stimulate investigation and investigation will bring out information, and the facts will be known, and upon the facts as ascertained the decision will be rendered, and I think my friends and your Honor, that if we are actuated by the spirit that should actuate every one of us, no matter what our views may be, we ought not only desire but pray that that which is right will prevail, whether it be our way or somebody else’s.”

That is from the man who is accused by Inherit the Wind of trying to destroy debate, when in fact he is calling for Debate. That is the biggest slander ever made against a politician a complete flipping of his position. Only the GOP spin machine can do that and even then it took over 25 years, The Great Depression, WWII and the start of the Cold War. Such slander has to be addressed or the Democrats will end up like Bryan i.e. being defined by the GOP in way to make Americans hate him do to the attacks against him.

[dwightspencer]

11. Did not prevent anyone from voting?

Does this character make hang-up calls to 911, too? I hope he gets the book thrown at him. Meddling with the fragile process we have in place is immoral and those who wish to resort to such cheap trickery should have to be punished.

[formercia]

12. There surely were elderly or physically challenged

voters who tried to call for a ride to the polls. It shouldn't be difficult to find a number of voters who would testify that they were not able to vote because they couldn't call for a ride.

It was the whole purpose of the jamming campaign and it denied many of our most vulnerable citizens the ability to participate in the process.

Bill Frist was in charge of the organization at the time. I would love to see him implicated in this.