Qanon shaman...likely to get a new trial considering the government withheld video evidence from the defense....

[BackAgain]

If the prosecution thought it wasn't exculpatory, the correct move would be to have the judge review it in camera and rule on a motion by the prosecution to exclude the video. Not to completely hide the requested evidence from not only the defense, but the court as well. The prosecution doesn't get to decide what evidence will be produced in court. That's the judge's job.

You are absolutely correct. The prosecution doesn’t get to unilaterally decide on behalf of the defense what a diligent defense attorney might consider exculpatory.

 

[Marener]

None of that is testimony. It's the plea deal he agreed to.

Not sure what you are thinking about testimony. It never went to trial so there was never any testimony given in court.

The document I gave you indicated what they would have brough to trial and Chansley signed it attesting to it's veracity.

 

[Leo123]

The judge has some things to answer for too.

The exculpatory videos were withheld from the court.

 

[BackAgain]

What follows is the statement filed by the United States in the case about what they would allegedly have been able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt (based on the evidence) to justify the plea the defendant agreed to:

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/case-multi-defendant/file/1430996/download

In particular consider these specific paragraphs:

Objectively, I’m very curious how they would have met that standard had these newly released videos been available at trial. I also suspect the plea wouldn’t have been to the count they had the defendant agree to.

They may have been able to justify a trespass plea. But beyond that, the entire prosecution seems to now be on very shaky grounds.

 

[Faun]

The exculpatory videos were withheld from the court.

What was exculpatory about those videos?

 

[DudleySmith]

To get anything overturned on appeal he'd have to show that the evidence was actually exculpatory and that it would have

rotflmao

Now this clown is pretending 'exculpatory' is part of its normal vocabulary or something. lol what a fraud.

 

[DudleySmith]

What was exculpatory about those videos?

lol another one.

 

[Faun]

lol another one.

What a shame you had to resort to ad hominem because you don't want to answer the question.

 

[1srelluc]

The exculpatory videos were withheld from the court.

So if the defense attorney asked for and was denied them why didn't the judge order the feds to produce them?

 

[Faun]

So if the defense attorney asked for and was denied them why didn't the judge order the feds to produce them?

Who says these videos were readily available when BuffaloHead pled guilty?

 

[Leo123]

rotflmao

Now this clown is pretending 'exculpatory' is part of its normal vocabulary or something. lol what a fraud.

The courts were denied discovery in the first place. Carlson’s video shows exculpatory evidence.

So if the defense attorney asked for and was denied them why didn't the judge order the feds to produce them?

The court was told they had all the videos. Outright lies by the J6 ghouls.

 

[DudleySmith]

What a shame you had to resort to ad hominem because you don't want to answer the question.

What a shame you're as phony as a three dollar bill.

 

[1srelluc]

The courts were denied discovery in the first place. Carlson’s video shows exculpatory evidence.

The court was told they had all the videos. Outright lies by the J6 ghouls.

Fair enough.

 

[AZrailwhale]

So if the defense attorney asked for and was denied them why didn't the judge order the feds to produce them?

The prosecution didn't refuse to produce the videos, they chose what videos they wanted to release and ignored the request for others. The court never knew the extra videos even existed.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Who says these videos were readily available when BuffaloHead pled guilty?

Readily available or not, the prosecution is required to produce them. The FBI could manage to scan probably millions of videos to identify protestors, so demanding the prosecution use the same tech to comply with the law isn't unreasonable.

 

[1srelluc]

The prosecution didn't refuse to produce the videos, they chose what videos they wanted to release and ignored the request for others. The court never knew the extra videos even existed.

So, judicial malfeasance?

 

[Faun]

What a shame you're as phony as a three dollar bill.

LOL

A pity you're incapable of defending your position.

 

[Faun]

Readily available or not, the prosecution is required to produce them. The FBI could manage to scan probably millions of videos to identify protestors, so demanding the prosecution use the same tech to comply with the law isn't unreasonable.

Prosecutors said their investigation was ongoing at that time. They didn't have all the evidence they would obtain after BuffaloHead pleaded guilty. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this evidence was among the evidence later obtained; I don't know if it was or if it wasn’t -- but neither do the posters here claiming prosecutors had this and didn't turn it over to the defense.

 

[DudleySmith]

LOL

A pity you're incapable of defending your position.

A pity you have no position, just parrot rubbish.

 

[Faun]

A pity you have no position, just parrot rubbish.