Texas Gov Rick Perry Indicted

[The_Lillard_King]

Ouch, bad time to flex his muscle as he was a strong contender for the 2016 republican presidential candidate:

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — A grand jury indicted Texas Gov. Rick Perry on Friday for allegedly abusing the powers of his office by carrying out a threat to veto funding for state prosecutors investigating public corruption — making the possible 2016 presidential hopeful his state's first indicted governor in nearly a century.



http://news.yahoo.com/texas-perry-indicted-coercion-veto-threat-224901143.html

 

[MarAzul]

Ouch, bad time to flex his muscle as he was a strong contender for the 2016 republican presidential candidate:

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — A grand jury indicted Texas Gov. Rick Perry on Friday for allegedly abusing the powers of his office by carrying out a threat to veto funding for state prosecutors investigating public corruption — making the possible 2016 presidential hopeful his state's first indicted governor in nearly a century.


http://news.yahoo.com/texas-perry-indicted-coercion-veto-threat-224901143.html

I don't understand how a sitting Governor can be indited for vetoing a funding bill! Sounds like what he is elected to do inline with the job.

 

[Denny Crane]

They can't beat him at the ballot box, so they stoop to the un democratic things.

 

[RR7]

David L. Botsford, Perry's defense attorney, whose $450-per hour fees are being paid for by state funds, said he was outraged by the action.

I'm not going to claim to know state or national protocol on legal proceedings against governors, representatives, etc. But this sort of thing annoys me to no end. What does the cost of the attorney, and who it is paid bym have to do with the rest of the story? You see this all the time, ON BOTH SIDES, where you drop a bugget in, and now soon we'll see the outrage over how much public money he is spending, etc. Just report the damned story.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Scary. In Texas you can go straight from indictment to hanging.

 

[Denny Crane]

I'm not going to claim to know state or national protocol on legal proceedings against governors, representatives, etc. But this sort of thing annoys me to no end. What does the cost of the attorney, and who it is paid bym have to do with the rest of the story? You see this all the time, ON BOTH SIDES, where you drop a bugget in, and now soon we'll see the outrage over how much public money he is spending, etc. Just report the damned story.

It actually does have significance. Perry has a net worth of about $3M, while the prosecution has unlimited funds. It's only fair that both sides have equal access to the legal system, no?

It also doesn't seem right that people who oppose a veto could bankrupt the governor through litigation.

As you point out, the taxpayers should know the cost and judge for themselves if they want to be outraged.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Surprised by some of the comments as at the very least it appears he tried to force a District Attorney to resign. This is probably a good thing for the republican party as he can now be eliminated as a presidential candidate rather than all this play out if he was the republican candidate.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

It actually does have significance. Perry has a net worth of about $3M, while the prosecution has unlimited funds. It's only fair that both sides have equal access to the legal system, no?

It also doesn't seem right that people who oppose a veto could bankrupt the governor through litigation.

As you point out, the taxpayers should know the cost and judge for themselves if they want to be outraged.

Prosecution has unlimited funds, where do you get that idea?

 

[PDXFonz]

Scary. In Texas you can go straight from indictment to hanging.

I thought they hang you first and indict you later.

 

[Denny Crane]

http://www.texaslawyer.com/id=12026...n?mcode=1202666895810&slreturn=20140715225430

 

[Denny Crane]

Prosecution has unlimited funds, where do you get that idea?

Who pays for the prosecution lawyers?

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Who pays for the prosecution lawyers?

Gov't through a budget allocated to the District Attorney's office, like in every criminal case. District Attorney's offices have limited budgets . . . much too low if you ask me, but regardless they have a budget. How much do you think prosecutors make per hour?

Should every defendant get a $450.00/hr lawyer so they have "equal access to the legal system"

 

[RR7]

It actually does have significance. Perry has a net worth of about $3M, while the prosecution has unlimited funds. It's only fair that both sides have equal access to the legal system, no?

It also doesn't seem right that people who oppose a veto could bankrupt the governor through litigation.

As you point out, the taxpayers should know the cost and judge for themselves if they want to be outraged.

I'm not neceassarily opposed to his lawyer being publicly paid for, and wasn't trying to say that at all. So I agree that they shouldn't try to bankrupt his private net worth. I was saying it seemed like an unfair attack against him by the media in that it didn't seem tohave relevance to the article, but if you were already angry at him, it was going to be another thing to shake your fist about

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I thought they hang you first and indict you later.

Only if you're black or Mexican.

 

[Denny Crane]

Gov't through a budget allocated to the District Attorney's office, like in every criminal case. District Attorney's offices have limited budgets . . . much too low if you ask me, but regardless they have a budget. How much do you think prosecutors make per hour?

Should every defendant get a $450.00/hr lawyer so they have "equal access to the legal system"

The govt. pays for defense lawyers if the defendant can't afford one.

The prosecutor and his team worked basically 24/7 on this. Perry's lawyer surely did not.

 

[Denny Crane]

I'm not neceassarily opposed to his lawyer being publicly paid for, and wasn't trying to say that at all. So I agree that they shouldn't try to bankrupt his private net worth. I was saying it seemed like an unfair attack against him by the media in that it didn't seem tohave relevance to the article, but if you were already angry at him, it was going to be another thing to shake your fist about

My guess is the people will rally behind him and his ratings will go up.

This seems like a separation of powers issue, not a criminal one. Congress can deny funding what Perry wants by voting it down, Perry can pressure congress via veto threat and the veto itself.

I'm pretty sure we saw a similar pressure on Bob Filner, mayor of SD, to resign, and he was never arrested or spent time in jail.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

The govt. pays for defense lawyers if the defendant can't afford one.

The prosecutor and his team worked basically 24/7 on this. Perry's lawyer surely did not.

ok . . . if you say so

 

[Denny Crane]

ok . . . if you say so

Yeah I do.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-16/texas-governor-perry-indicted-on-abuse-of-power-charge.html

Special Prosecutor Michael McCrum said the Travis County grand jury indicted Perry on two counts, one of abuse of official capacity and one of coercion of a public servant.

“There’s evidence to support all of the language in both counts,” McCrum said today in a phone interview. “I can’t speak to the evidence, but I can tell you that I interviewed over 40 people, I reviewed hundreds of documents, and I believe there’s evidence to support the charges.

What is a special prosecutor's budget?

If he needed to interview over 50 people, would lack of funds prevented it? What if he wanted to look at thousands of documents instead of hundreds?

It's pretty easy to get a grand jury to indict, as the burden of proof at that point is low. It's even easier to do if it all goes down in a partisan district.

Edit: burden of proof to indict is 12 votes out of 23 jurors.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Yeah I do.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-16/texas-governor-perry-indicted-on-abuse-of-power-charge.html



What is a special prosecutor's budget?

If he needed to interview over 50 people, would lack of funds prevented it? What if he wanted to look at thousands of documents instead of hundreds?

It's pretty easy to get a grand jury to indict, as the burden of proof at that point is low. It's even easier to do if it all goes down in a partisan district.

Edit: burden of proof to indict is 12 votes out of 23 jurors.

You are right DC . . . prosecutors have unlimited funds.

And burden of proof is directly related to number of votes needed to indict.

 

[Denny Crane]

You are right DC . . . prosecutors have unlimited funds.

And burden of proof is directly related to number of votes needed to indict.

It's pretty easy to get 12 votes when the jury is comprised of Likely Perry opponents in a politically motivated case.

So I'm glad you agree.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

It's pretty easy to get 12 votes when the jury is comprised of Likely Perry opponents in a politically motivated case.

So I'm glad you agree.

Yea only burden of proof has nothing to do with number of votes needed to indict or convict . . . two totally different concepts.

 

[Denny Crane]

Yea only burden of proof has nothing to do with number of votes needed to indict or convict . . . two totally different concepts.

Sure it does. The evidence means nothing if you can't get the juror's votes.

The standard for grand jury is low, and indictment is not a finding of guilt - just that the case may (or may not) have merit.

This is a political case. The venue was chosen to be the most unfriendly district in the state for Perry. This was done to have the best chance of getting at least 12 votes.

The intent isn't necessarily to convict Perry, just to damage his political career going forward.

Perry had nothing personal to gain from the veto, he was within his right to veto for any reason.

If the voters are unhappy with him, they should recall him or not vote for him next time. Otherwise, he should do his job as he sees fit.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Sure it does. The evidence means nothing if you can't get the juror's votes.

The standard for grand jury is low, and indictment is not a finding of guilt - just that the case may (or may not) have merit.

This is a political case. The venue was chosen to be the most unfriendly district in the state for Perry. This was done to have the best chance of getting at least 12 votes.

The intent isn't necessarily to convict Perry, just to damage his political career going forward.

Perry had nothing personal to gain from the veto, he was within his right to veto for any reason.

If the voters are unhappy with him, they should recall him or not vote for him next time. Otherwise, he should do his job as he sees fit.

No, the burden of proof is a completely different concept than how many people you need to get to vote a criminal charge should be brought to get an indictment.

Every time I challenge you on a statement to show you really don't know what you are talking about, you rattle a bunch of stuff and get off topic.

When you say prosecution has unlimited funds, that is incorrect. And when you say burden of proof to indict is 12 votes out of 23 jurors. it tells me you don't really know what you are talking about.

The other stuff you are saying may or may not be right, I don't know.

 

[oldmangrouch]

As they say, the devil is in the details.

A governor can't "sell" his veto anymore than he can take bribes to perform/not perform any other official function. Did Perry offer to not veto the bill in exchange for some payment or favor? The definition of "bribes" is not limited to envelopes full of cash.

At this point, we don't really have a clear picture of what Perry is accused of doing. It may be true that this is just another political pissing match....or Perry may have crossed a legal line.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Perry had nothing personal to gain from the veto, he was within his right to veto for any reason.

The first part of your statement is the factual dispute at the heart of the case. As I just explained, the 2nd part of your statement is wrong. The exercise of the veto power is not exempt from laws governing bribery, extortion, and influence peddling.

 

[jlprk]

The govt. pays for defense lawyers if the defendant can't afford one.

Only for criminal cases. After my parents died, the evil legal system robbed my family of 1/3 of our inherited estate, and I could find no lawyer who would represent me.

As for criminal cases, the public defender isn't free. The defendant is billed $1500 in Washington State. I don't know what it is in other states.

 

[Denny Crane]

No, the burden of proof is a completely different concept than how many people you need to get to vote a criminal charge should be brought to get an indictment.

Every time I challenge you on a statement to show you really don't know what you are talking about, you rattle a bunch of stuff and get off topic.

When you say prosecution has unlimited funds, that is incorrect. And when you say burden of proof to indict is 12 votes out of 23 jurors. it tells me you don't really know what you are talking about.

The other stuff you are saying may or may not be right, I don't know.

The standard for grand jury is low, and indictment is not a finding of guilt - just that the case may (or may not) have merit.

What is the standard for grand jury? Preponderance of the evidence. The defense doesn't get to present a case. The jury is large so you don't have to work as hard to convince each juror. Low standard. The case may or may not have merit.

If the grand jury does not vote in favor of indictment, the standard is not met.

In any case, this is a political move. The intent is to indict, not to administer justice. It doesn't matter what the standard is, the burden of proof is met by 12 votes and that's all the prosecution cares about. Not justice.

http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=109

...the ultimate decision as to whether the plaintiff has met his/her burden of proof rests with the jury or the judge if there is no jury.

http://www.alancaplan.com/FAQ_1.html

As you have probably discovered, retaining an experienced private attorney in a serious criminal case can be extremely, if not prohibitively expensive for many people. That is especially true because the prosecution has what effectively amounts to unlimited funds to go after you.

But you win, whatever it is you think you won.

 

[Denny Crane]

Only for criminal cases. After my parents died, the evil legal system robbed my family of 1/3 of our inherited estate, and I could find no lawyer who would represent me.

As for criminal cases, the public defender isn't free. The defendant is billed $1500 in Washington State. I don't know what it is in other states.

http://www.kingcounty.gov/courts/OPD/Services/ProvideAttorney.aspx

• If you are found indigent, it means you cannot afford an attorney. You will be assigned to a public defense division.
• If you are found able to contribute, it means you have enough money that you cannot be found indigent, but you do not have enough money to hire a private attorney. You will be assigned to a public defense division, but you will be asked to sign a promissory note. The note means that you will make payments to help pay for your attorney. King County will send you a monthly bill, giving you up to 12 months to pay for your attorney.

 

[Denny Crane]

The first part of your statement is the factual dispute at the heart of the case. As I just explained, the 2nd part of your statement is wrong. The exercise of the veto power is not exempt from laws governing bribery, extortion, and influence peddling.

I agree that the governor is not exempt from laws governing bribery, extortion, and influence peddling. Or murder or any other actual crime.

What the news is reporting is that Perry was indicted for coercion:

http://abc13.com/politics/texas-perry-indicted-for-coercion-for-veto-threat/264232/

A special prosecutor spent months calling witnesses and presenting evidence that Perry broke the law when he promised publicly to nix $7.5 million over two years for the public integrity unit, which is run by Travis County Democratic District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg's office.

...

Grand jurors indicted Perry on abuse of official capacity, a first-degree felony with potential punishments of five to 99 years in prison, and coercion of a public servant, a third-degree felony that carries a punishment of two to 10 years.

No one disputes that Perry is allowed to veto measures approved by the Legislature, including part or all of the state budget. But the left-leaning Texans for Public Justice government watchdog group filed an ethics complaint accusing the governor of coercion because he threatened to use his veto before actually doing so in an attempt to pressure Lehmberg to quit.

...

Lehmberg oversees the office's public integrity unit, which investigates statewide allegations of corruption and political wrongdoing. Perry said he wouldn't allow Texas to fund the unit while Lehmberg remained in charge.

Perry said Lehmberg, who is based in Austin, should resign after she was arrested and pleaded guilty to drunken driving in April 2013. A video recording made at the jail showed Lehmberg shouting at staffers to call the sheriff, kicking the door of her cell and sticking her tongue out.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Only for criminal cases. After my parents died, the evil legal system robbed my family of 1/3 of our inherited estate, and I could find no lawyer who would represent me.

As for criminal cases, the public defender isn't free. The defendant is billed $1500 in Washington State. I don't know what it is in other states.

You mention something that pisses a lot of people off. When someone gets charged with a crime, they are told if they can't afford one, one will be appointed to them (implying they will get one for free). But in the end, many have to pay fees for the court appointed attorney.

I think the bigger injustice is that prosecutors are paid much better than public defenders. So you get better attorneys prosecuting cases than attorneys defending people who need public defenders. (If you can afford to hire a private attorney, than I think you often get an attorney better than prosecutors)

Here in Oregon, the rate varies county to county but rate for public defenders is about $600 for simple felonies and $400 for misdemeanors. If convicted and put on probation, you pay it off in monthly installments unless a judge waives it.

If I was charged with a crime, I wouldn't hesitate to retain a private attorney.