PDA

View Full Version : What a joke!!


MavsFanFinley
09-16-2003, 07:29 PM
Associated Press

DETROIT -- A federal judge on Tuesday deferred for about two years the sentencing of Sacramento Kings star Chris Webber, who admitted lying to a grand jury about his dealings with a former University of Michigan basketball booster.

U.S. District Judge Nancy Edmunds instead ordered a provision to Webber's bond that requires him to volunteer at a six-week summer literacy program at Butzel Middle School in Detroit in the summers of 2004 and 2005. Webber must work at least 150 hours each summer.

Edmunds deferred sentencing until August or September of 2005.

In July, Webber pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of criminal contempt a day before jury selection was to begin in his perjury trial.

Webber and his father, Mayce Webber Jr., were accused of lying about money authorities say the player received from ex-booster Ed Martin. The maximum penalty would have been five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

"I believe that Mr. Webber understands the seriousness of his offense, that he is remorseful," Edmunds said at a brief hearing. But she said she was undecided whether to treat Webber's criminal contempt plea as a felony or misdemeanor.

"I don't call this punishment," Webber's attorney, Steve Fishman, said after the hearing. "Chris is looking forward to participating."

Outside the federal courthouse, Webber apologized to his fans, thanked the judge and thanked the people of Detroit and Sacramento for their support. He said he maintains strong emotional ties to the University of Michigan despite the payment scandal.

"My heart bleeds maize and blue," he said. "They were the happiest days of my life."

Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Convertino said the judge's decision was unprecedented but declined comment on it.

A day after Webber's plea, the charges against his father were dropped for "weak or inadmissible sufficient evidence," according to a court order.

In his plea, Webber admitted lying to the grand jury on Aug. 2, 2000, in saying he did not recall giving money to Martin, who died earlier this year. Webber now acknowledges that in 1994 he gave Martin about $38,000 in cash as partial repayment for expenditures Martin made on his behalf.

Martin, who died in February at age 69, pleaded guilty in 2002 to conspiracy to launder money and told federal prosecutors he took gambling money, combined it with other funds and lent $616,000 to Webber and three other Michigan players.

In November, Michigan imposed sanctions on itself, including a one-year postseason ban, and forfeited 112 regular-season and tournament victories from five seasons, including its victory in the 1992 NCAA semifinal.

In May, the NCAA infractions committee banned Michigan from another year of postseason play, reduced the number of scholarships the school is allowed to have and placed the program on probation.

ocelot_ark
09-16-2003, 08:05 PM
bull. shit.

ocelot_ark
09-16-2003, 08:05 PM
double post

Chiwas
09-16-2003, 08:52 PM
A serious joke.

Nash13
09-16-2003, 09:25 PM
This really urks me to the point where i have no respect for the Federal Court. You mean to tell me that innocent college basketball players had to miss a season and a chance to shine because of Webber's mistakes, and he goes scotch free?

I wonder what kind of punishment the Maloof brothers are going to give him?

Drbio
09-16-2003, 09:43 PM
Originally posted by: ocelot_ark
bull. shit.


Uber Bull Shit!

kg_veteran
09-16-2003, 09:58 PM
"I believe that Mr. Webber understands the seriousness of his offense, that he is remorseful," Edmunds said at a brief hearing.

I bet 99.9% of the other criminals making a plea bargain in Judge Edmunds' court wish they could hear these words. Hey, if you're remorseful, why do you need to be sentenced?

And the real pity of it all is that Judge Edmunds is a federal district judge, meaning she is appointed and not subject to removal except by impeachment. If this were a Texas state court, Judge Edmunds would get "un-elected" for such a complete abdication of her judicial responsibilities.

Shaq Attack2
09-16-2003, 10:36 PM
But Webber is god!

This makes me hate Webber even more. I wouldn't be surprised if he had Martin assassinated.

Drbio
09-16-2003, 10:47 PM
Originally posted by: Shaq Attack2
But Webber is god!

This makes me hate Webber even more. I wouldn't be surprised if he had Martin assassinated.

He died of a pulmonary embolism. i/expressions/rolleye.gif

u2sarajevo
09-16-2003, 10:51 PM
Are the lawyers on this site defense lawyers? If so, do you take joy when you read stuff like this? I can't believe that can happen. I mean I guess I should since it did, but every time a celeb gets preferencial treatment it makes me lose faith in our judicial system...

Up next? Kobe. He wont see a jail cell, which should make you happy ShaqAttack.... Not saying he should, but even if he were guilty (which I obviously do not know) I think he would be found not guilty or get probation or something less than jail time.

When will a celebrity ever do time? Did that Barbarella guy ever get a sentence? Did he go free?

MFFL
09-17-2003, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by: u2sarajevo
When will a celebrity ever do time?

Mike Tyson did hard time but that is an exception. I don't think it has as much to do with being a celebrity as it has to do with money. The best lawyers cost a lot of money and they are worth every cent.

OutletPass
09-17-2003, 01:40 AM
Nope U2, I was a prosecutor in the DA's office here in Dallas (Dooby doesn't do criminal defense either...he's in a completely different field) and I hate this shit. (And as you can tell, so does Brother KG) . Since MFF posted it, I did a little research on this judge. No connection to the University of Michigan in her background. She has two sons...no connection there either. They're out East. She's had some interesting cases...the Haddad detention case is one...here's a bit from the description:

"A federal judge in Detroit ruled Wednesday that a government policy to close deportation hearings of individuals targeted in the sweeping terrorism investigation launched after the Sept. 11 attacks is unconstitutional. The decision by U.S. District Judge Nancy G. Edmunds is the first by a federal judge on the controversial issue of closed hearings and could have a broad influence." The 6th Circuit later overturned her.

Not too much to say about most of her major decisions; a lot of trademark litigation...an abortion case that wasn't much..Kid Rock's fight with his "business partners"..the only other criminal case of any note is the "Cash Flow Posse" case, where the Federal Government tried to impose the death penalty on some local gang members fighting over turf...she ruled that the Federal Government didn't have jurisdiction as there wasn't any "Interstate Commerce" involved.

There's no real "constant" in her cases...nothing to really define her....The most that I can say is that it seems that she's very independent...not liberal, not conservative...just kind of a maverick judge. Maybe that explains the Webber decision.

The idea of diversion has been around in the law for a while, here's the idea: Appplicable when it appears that both society and the defendant will benefit by involving the defendant in a meaningful rehabilitation program, thereby avoiding deleterious effects that normal criminal prosecution has on the offender and the resources of the justice system. Diversion is accomplished by both deferred sentencing and deferred prosecution. It is sometimes administered after a guilty plea is entered, which plea is expunged (removed) from the defendant’s records if he/she meets the terms of the diversion. (Watch out for this down the road, it's a pretty sure bet)

The Federal Prosecutor's statement was a little strange to me....deferred sentencing has been around for a while. There's a Federal case in oklahoma that I know of...where a man plead guilty to "lewd acts with a minor" and his sentence was deferred for 5 (DAMN) years. Pure insanity. I'm going to do some more research on the subject and will report back what I find.

As a prosecutor, you work VERY hard...and then a Judge does something like this out of the blue. It just makes you crazy...so, wonder why I quit practicing and turned to writing ? How can I, as an adult and an attorney, adequately explain this to a great, young guy like Nash13 after reading his post and say "The system makes sense". I can't and won't because it doesn't.

We may be focused on Webber's case because we're Mavs' fans...but he's just one small piece in this nonsense. Try this on for size: The child molester in Oklahoma may well have his conviction expunged (erased) from his record some day. This is what we, as prosecutors, have to fight against every damn day...and if it doesn't go our way because of some Maverick judge...we have to find a way to live with it. Ultimately, I couldn't and can't.

Shaq Attack2
09-17-2003, 02:39 AM
Originally posted by: Drbio

Originally posted by: Shaq Attack2
But Webber is god!

This makes me hate Webber even more. I wouldn't be surprised if he had Martin assassinated.

He died of a pulmonary embolism. i/expressions/rolleye.gif

Gee really..... i/expressions/rolleye.gif

MavsFanatik33
09-17-2003, 07:18 AM
Not far, not far at all. I can't believe Webber will be let off without anything, makes me doubt the justice system.

Jeremiah
09-17-2003, 07:23 AM
Federal law seems to consider lying to a federal grand jury particularly bad, given the maximum sentencing parameter. Can someone make an analogy with another scenario that is more offensive? Something like conning people (or being a defense witness that lies to the grand jury so that that would be the charge, and not fraud) out of their life savings using the USPS as a means to transfer funds, or being a witness to a police officers beating a man(I remember Bush getting a law passed that allowed the 4 LA cops in the King trial to be re-tried under federal jurisdiction, I just can't remember what the law was) but lying to a federal grand jury about what s/he saw? I want the analogy because I am having difficulty understanding why there is a federal law against lying to a federal grand jury, and it carries such a high maximum penalty relative to the act. Or if someone knows how regularly this law is used to punish someone in comparison to other charges, I'd like to hear that. A college athlete lying about receiving benefits just doesn't get me all hot and bothered when that athlete is not punished with jail time, probation or a fine by the courts. While the lying appears to be considered a very bad thing to do, the context that it lies just doesn't seem to warrant a heavy hand.

EricaLubarsky
09-17-2003, 10:43 AM
the judge cited letters in support of Webber? Is that a permissable reason to defer sentencing?

OutletPass
09-17-2003, 11:43 AM
Yes, it is Erica. Just think of it as having "character witnesses" testifying for you while a judge/jury is deciding whether or not to give you prison time or probation. Deferred sentencing is quite a bit like probation, with these differences. With deferred sentencing, you plead "no contest" rather than guilty; allowing your "conviction" to be expunged at the end of the sentencing period. In addition, you don't report to a probation officer or have to pay a monthly probation fee. I've always felt that it was just a way to take the burden off of an understaffed and overworked probation system. Giving Webber deferred sentencing paves the way for his perjury conviction to be completely erased from his record two years from now.

Here's some info, some cases where deferred sentencing has been granted, and a letter which states (in my opinion) why deferred sentencing exists. Before reading this, keep in mind that deferred sentencing was originally designed for drug/alcohol cases where it was thought that the Defendant could undergo successful rehabilitation. Since then, it's been applied to a wide variety of cases, as you will see. Deferred sentencing is also used, for short periods such as 30 days, for Probation Services to do a Report and recommend prison or probation but that's not the case here.



The idea: DEFERRED SENTENCE

A Deferred Sentence postpones a sentencing decision and, as a general rule, is used as a way of taking the offender's conduct into account at sentence. A deferment has a general condition "to be of good behaviour" and more specific conditions can be added, e.g. to make restitution to the victim or to attend an alcohol education programme.

Deferred Sentence and Probation Orders should not be confused. The main differences are that:

Deferred Sentence does not normally provide for the regular supervision of the offender except on a voluntary basis;
the means of enforcing compliance with any conditions are limited;
the offender is subject to sentence at the end of the period of deferment.
================================================== ================================================== =====================

What's what in Texas:

In Texas, the statutory deferred adjudication procedure includes the following language:

"(a) Except as provided by Subsection (d) of this section, when in the judge's opinion the best interest of society and the defendant will be served, the judge may, after receiving a plea of guilty or plea of nolo contendere, hearing the evidence, and finding that it substantiates the defendant's guilt, defer further proceedings without entering an adjudication of guilt, and place the defendant on community supervision . . . .

================================================== ================================================== =====================

Cases from around the Country (Real Life):

================================================== ================================================== =====================

Starting with a real horror story:

Former District Judge Robert L. Foster is now a convicted felon, but he is not serving prison time. Kay County District Judge D.W. Boyd decided Thursday to accelerate Foster's five-year deferred sentence. But the judge suspended all five years of the sentence, according to court records.

Boyd also sentenced Foster to Department of Corrections-supervised probation for the first two years of the suspended sentence, and Foster is to pay the related fees, records indicated. He is to serve 100 hours of community service in a manner that does not involve children under the age of 18, records continued.

The 73-year-old former judge was charged in May 1997 with lewd molestation. He was accused of molesting a 12-year-old Meeker girl, according to past News-Star reports. Foster pleaded no contest in June 1998 to an amended felony count of assault with intent to commit the felony of obtaining lewd and indecent photos of a child, Christiansen said. His plea was made a few days before the trial was set to begin. Foster received a five-year deferred sentence, with one year supervised. He was fined $500 and assessed a $1,000 Victim's Compensation Assessment, according to court records.

The former judge was ordered to serve 100 hours of community service within a year, secure at least 25 hours of counseling from a psychiatrist or psychologist at his own expense and make restitution or pay any reasonable expenses for counseling required by the victim or her family, according to court records. In addition, "the defendant will not initiate any contact, directly or indirectly, verbally, or in writing, telephonically or otherwise" with the victim or any of her family, court records stated. In December 1999, Christiansen filed a motion to accelerate Foster's sentence allegedly violated this last term of his probation.

According to the motion, Foster allegedly contacted his victim three times in 1999. He allegedly made contact with her on or about Feb. 1, 1999, in the parking lot of the Chandler High School Fieldhouse after a basketball game in which the girl played, Christiansen said. The second violation happened in June 1999, when the former judge allegedly encountered the girl in front of her home in rural Lincoln County, according to the motion. Christiansen said the third alleged incident occurred in September 1999, when the defendant made contact with the victim three times within about 20 minutes at the Park Road softball field in Chandler, where the girl was playing softball.

Christiansen said the state proved to Judge Boyd that encounters were not accidental and that Foster willfully and knowingly violated his probation. The district attorney said she asked Boyd to give the maximum sentence, which is five years, for assault with intent to commit the felony of obtaining lewd and indecent photos of a child. The judge gave Foster five years with the DOC, but then suspended the sentence.

================================================== ================================================== =====================
Driver in fatal hit-and-run receives deferred sentence
By ERICKA SCHENCK SMITH of the Missoulian

The man accused of negligent homicide in the hit-and-run death of University of Montana Russian professor Marina Kanevskaya received a two-year deferred sentence in District Court on Tuesday.

Lee hit Kanevskaya with his truck on the night of Dec. 13, 2002, and knocked her down as she was crossing Maurice Avenue near the entrance to the Adams Center parking lot. Police said Lee then stopped, checked his truck and drove away without seeing Kanevskaya in the road or offering help. Kanevskaya was likely killed by a second driver who could not see her in the road. The second driver was not cited.

Lee's attorney, Morgan Modine, said a deferred sentence would allow his client to keep his logging job and pay restitution to Kanevskaya's family. Part of the deferred sentence calls for Lee to pay Kanevskaya's medical and funeral expenses.

================================================== ================================================== =====================
Lubbock man receives deferred sentence in concession stand robbery

By GRAHAM UNDERWOOD
Avalanche-Journal

The case of a Little League ballpark concession stand robbery ended Monday with a deferred sentence for the Lubbock man who admitted committing the holdup to support his cocaine addiction. "You've had all the chances you're going to get, and I think you know that,'' 237th District Judge John McFall told Daniel Paul Ferullo. "I think you still have a conscience.''

If Ferullo completes 10 years without violating any of the conditions of his sentence, his conviction will not be put on record.

Elizabeth Driver and Chessa Hilliard said they were working the concession stand at the Western Little League ballpark near South Plains Mall when a man with his face covered approachedn and asked for the cash box, which held about $100. After being refused the money, the robber then pointed an empty BB pistol at the face of one of the teen-agers, and demanded again. When they still didn't hand over the money, the man reached inside, grabbed the box and ran.

================================================== ================================================== =====================
Linda Guzman, 45, of 38 Broadway, was arrested early on March 10, 2001, after her car crashed into a snow bank along SR902 (Springgarden St.), in Lansford, at the bottom of the hill that leads to Summit Hill. Guzman, who did not testify at the trial before Judge Roger Nanovic II, submitted to a blood/alcohol content test which revealed a .206 per cent. She was found guilty of operating a motor vehicle at a time she was under the influence of alcohol to a degree it made her incapable of safe driving and also of driving a vehicle when her blood/alochol content was .10 percent or higher.

Assistant District Attorney Michael Greek called the arresting officer and three hospital personnel who were involved in the blood test. Officer Jack Soberick, of the Lansford police, testified he responded to a reported accident about 3 a.m. He said upon arriving on scene he said he saw a woman in a car which was "caught up" in a snow bank. He said she was "rocking" the car back and forth in an attempt to get the vehicle free. Soberick said he walked up to the car and identified the driver as Guzman, who he said he knew from a prior contact. He said he smelled a moderate to strong odor of alcohol coming from the car. He asked her for his license, registration card and insurance information, which she supplied.

The officer then asked her to get out of the vehicle and submit to field sobriety tests. He said he administered two and she failed. He then placed her under arrest and asked her to submit to a blood test, to which she agreed. Soberick took her to St. Luke's Miners Memorial Hospital, Coaldale, for the test. Soberick said the entire incident went quickly. He said, "This was a classic drunk driving case." He said he had Guzman at the hospital by about 3:20 a.m. and the test was administered soon after.

Under questioning from defense Attorney Paul J. Levy, Soberick said Guzman kept repeating herself, and mentioned she had been drinking earlier in the evening. He said he didn't put that in his report because he felt it was not necessary. "This was a pretty routine case," he said. The three nurses included the one who drew the blood at the hospital, the one who tested it at the Good Samaritan Hospital, Pottsville, and the records clerk from the hospital. Levy attempted to attack the blood test results. The jury got the case from Nanovic at about 3 p.m. and returned about 3:50 p.m. with its verdict.

Nanovic deferred sentencing.
================================================== ================================================== =====================
A Jim Thorpe teenager admitted in County Court on Thursday afternoon that he had sexual intercourse with a then 14-year-old girl. Steven M. Craigie, 18, of 44 W. Sixth St., pleaded guilty to one count of statutory sexual assault. He was one of several defendants in criminal cases to enter guilty pleas before Judge Roger N. Nanovic II.

Jim Thorpe police were called the Gnaden Huetten Memorial Hospital, Lehighton, to a reported rape victim. When officers arrived they were informed by the victim's mother that her daughter had been sexually assaulted by Craigie. According to police the assault occurred in a garage in the borough and that Craigie had sexual intercourse with her. When the charge and complaint was read Craigie began to dispute the allegation, but his defense counsel, Atty. Stephen P. Vlossak, said his client did have sexual intercourse with the girl. Nanovic read the elements of the offense which states that the defendant had sexual relations with a victim who was under the age of 16 while he was at least four years older than her. Under sentencing guidelines, Nanovic told Craigie, that he faced a minimum prison term between six to 14 months.

Nanovic deferred sentencing

================================================== ================================================== =====================
Two men involved in a burglary ring that stole All Terrain Vehicles (ATVs) and then sold them to members of a multiple-county crime ring, entered guilty pleas yesterday in County Court. Hosler admitted his part in the theft of several ATVs in the Junedale-Tresckow-Beaver Meadows area of Carbon. Acker was a co-defendant with Hosler in the thefts. Each told Webb they sold the stolen cycles. Hosler pleaded to three counts of theft and two of burglary. Acker pleaded to three counts of theft and one of burglary. Webb accepted the pleas but deferred sentencing and ordered a presentence investigation by the Carbon County Adult Probation office.

Webb told each that at the time of sentencing they better have a plan to make restitution to the victims.

================================================== ================================================== =====================
A Hazleton woman admitted in County Court yesterday that she stole over $40,000 from her then employer, Panther Creek Partners, a cogeneration operation in Nesquehoning. Bonnie Jo Evans, 31, of 621 W. Fourth St., told President Judge John P. Lavelle that she used the money to buy a new Chevrolet car from a Brodheadsville dealership, buy flowers for herself and had them delivered to her at work and for other unspecified items. According to police chief Joseph T. Tout she wrote checks to herself and forged the name of the company accountant. The checks ranged from as low as $700 to as high as $10,000. The thefts occurred over a period of May to October 1997. Atty. Morton Gordon, representing Evans, said his client confessed to the thefts because of a guilty conscience. That statement, however, was challenged by police. Tout said that she only admitted to the thefts when she knew she was going to be arrested. He also said after she confessed to the thefts, she wrote another check to herself and cashed it. The car and $1,975 were turned over to the company by Evans. That amount was also disputed. She originally said it was $2,500, but a company spokesman told Lavelle that it was actually $1,975. Lavelle accepted the plea to five counts of theft by deception with four of the five counts carrying a felony three rating and the fifth a misdemeanor one.

Lavelle said he would not impose sentence but asked for a presentence investigation (PSI) by the County Adult Probation office. Lavelle told Evans, "I want to hear your game plan for repaying this money when it comes time for sentencing."

================================================== ================================================== =====================
Woman given deferred sentence in Beanie scam

STILLWATER (AP) -- A woman who made up a story about a young girl dying of leukemia in order to obtain Beanie Babies has received deferred sentence. Barbara Shell, 57, of Glencoe plead guilty last week to obtaining money by false pretense. She was given a two-year deferred sentence, fined $150 and must serve 20 hours of community service. She was also ordered to resign from her position in Glencoe and to attend counseling sessions.

The scam involved approaching store owners where Beanie Babies were sold and showing them a fictitious letter from a 9-year-old girl named Angie who was dying of leukemia. The letter explained that the girl was in a hospital in Memphis, Tenn., and that her mother was financially strapped and didn't have a place to stay or food to eat. A Stillwater gift and novelty shop owner wrote a $1,000 check to the fictitious mother, according to an affidavit. The gift shop owner confronted Mrs. Shell after hearing two customers talking about a woman who made up a story about a girl dying of leukemia in order to obtain Beanie Babies.

================================================== ================================================== =====================
Student gets deferred sentence in alcohol-related crash

High school student Elizabeth Schafer received a four-year deferred sentence Wednesday for an alcohol-related crash that injured a Lubbock couple. District Judge William Shaver pronounced the sentence after the 18-year-old woman pleaded guilty to a charge of failure to stop and render aid. If Schafer completes the sentence without violating any of the probation-like conditions, the conviction will not be put on record. Schafer also was ordered to pay $129 in court costs and more than $2,500 in restitution to victims Melinda and Gerald Ward. The Wards were hurt on July 13, 1996, as they drove home from a movie. Gerald Ward said they were traveling east on 42nd Street when a car failed to stop for a stop sign and struck their van. Melinda Ward suffered a broken ankle. Witnesses said the car's driver, a young woman with long blond hair, looked into the Wards' van, then walked away on foot. A passenger in the woman's car, 17-year-old Adam Kinsey, also was injured. Kinsey later told police that Schafer was driving him home from a party where they had been drinking

================================================== ================================================== =====================
Ex-firefighter gets deferred sentences
Former Ardmore firefighter Steve Smith, who pleaded guilty last month to making racial slurs and threatening a local police officer while both men were on duty, was given two deferred sentences plus fines and was ordered to pay court costs following his sentencing hearing Monday in Carter County District Court.

================================================== ================================================== =====================
In Denver District Court, Harry Abdul Moore, 53, pled guilty to one felony count of Theft and one misdemeanor count of Computer Crime. Mr. Moore was sentenced to a four year deferred judgment on the theft charge and one year unsupervised probation on the computer crime charge. Mr. Moore was ordered to pay restitution to the Colorado Department of Labor & Employment in the amount of $8,158.00 in this Unemployment Insurance fraud.

================================================== ================================================== =====================
On December 3, 2001, Juan Mancilla, 31, of Golden, pled guilty in Denver District Court to a four-year deferred judgment and sentence for felony theft of unemployment insurance benefits, as well as pleading guilty to a misdemeanor charge of Computer Crime. Mr. Mancilla was sentenced to 1 years’ probation and 100 hours of community service, and ordered to pay restitution of $26,538.00.

================================================== ================================================== =====================
Stephanie Lanawn Cotrell, pleaded guilty to larceny of merchandise and received a two-year deferred sentence with 50 hours of community service.

================================================== ================================================== =====================
Jamie Dale Quaid, pleaded guilty to embezzlement by employee and conspiracy. He received a four-year deferred sentenced.

================================================== ================================================== =====================

Lucinda Puente, pleaded guilty to permitting child abuse and received an 18-month deferred sentence.

================================================== ================================================== =====================

The real Explanation:

The following is a letter to the New York Times by Wallace Cheatham:

To the Editor: The increasing use of deferred sentencing is simply a cry for help by the criminal judiciary and an admission of inability to operate within heretofore limited sentencing guidelines.

Wallace Cheatham

President United Probation Officers Assn.

u2sarajevo
09-17-2003, 11:58 AM
Thanks OP for your posts above. I can only imagine how frustrating these rulings are to you as a prosecutor. I find it equally as frustrating, as I am sure others do.

I think I would still feel the same if I wasn't a Mavericks fan. Every one of these cases involving a celebrity that gets off scott free leaves me feeling our system has more flaws than we suspect. And that is simply not fair.

Drbio
09-17-2003, 02:14 PM
I wouldn't expect Shaq Attackless2 to understand pulmonary embolism after that arthritis bit.

OutletPass
09-17-2003, 02:54 PM
Jeremiah...the case began as a grand Jury investigation of Martin running an illegal lottery....it wasn't about Webber at all, at first.

Lying to an Investigative Grand jury is obstruction of justice. Lying to a grand jury is also perjury. I think that's a pretty simple explanation of why it's a "big deal".

Webber escaped the whole thing when Martin died (as Martin was going to testify against Webber). After his death, Judge Edmunds ruled that Martin's "tally sheets" and records of payment were inadmissible. So, a "save face" deal was cut insuring that Webber wouldn't do time. Webber didn't want to have to go through a trial and the Prosecutor didn't want to take the risk of losing a high profile case. So he pleas to criminal contempt...and Judge Edmunds totally bags it by not sentencing him, then probating it...thus keeping it on his record. Because of the deferred sentencing, he can have it wiped off his record in two years, as though it never, ever happened.

And that's the ridiculous part to me. He perjured himself and admitted it....so, at the very least, it should be on his record.

kg_veteran
09-17-2003, 03:11 PM
He perjured himself and admitted it....so, at the very least, it should be on his record.

We'll just have to do our best to make sure that Webber doesn't forget -- every single time he comes to Dallas. i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif

Jeremiah
09-17-2003, 03:54 PM
Originally posted by: OutletPass
Jeremiah...the case began as a grand Jury investigation of Martin running an illegal lottery....it wasn't about Webber at all, at first.

Lying to an Investigative Grand jury is obstruction of justice. Lying to a grand jury is also perjury. I think that's a pretty simple explanation of why it's a "big deal".

Webber escaped the whole thing when Martin died (as Martin was going to testify against Webber). After his death, Judge Edmunds ruled that Martin's "tally sheets" and records of payment were inadmissible. So, a "save face" deal was cut insuring that Webber wouldn't do time. Webber didn't want to have to go through a trial and the Prosecutor didn't want to take the risk of losing a high profile case. So he pleas to criminal contempt...and Judge Edmunds totally bags it by not sentencing him, then probating it...thus keeping it on his record. Because of the deferred sentencing, he can have it wiped off his record in two years, as though it never, ever happened.

And that's the ridiculous part to me. He perjured himself and admitted it....so, at the very least, it should be on his record.

Thanks for the explanation.

FilthyFinMavs
09-17-2003, 04:32 PM
Originally posted by: u2sarajevo
Are the lawyers on this site defense lawyers? If so, do you take joy when you read stuff like this? I can't believe that can happen. I mean I guess I should since it did, but every time a celeb gets preferencial treatment it makes me lose faith in our judicial system...

Up next? Kobe. He wont see a jail cell, which should make you happy ShaqAttack.... Not saying he should, but even if he were guilty (which I obviously do not know) I think he would be found not guilty or get probation or something less than jail time.

When will a celebrity ever do time? Did that Barbarella guy ever get a sentence? Did he go free?
'

Rae Carruth? Mike Tyson? Not enough IMO. BTW, did Mark Chumra (sp) do time? I know his football career was over after that case.

Shaq Attack2
09-17-2003, 05:04 PM
Originally posted by: Drbio
I wouldn't expect Shaq Attackless2 to understand pulmonary embolism after that arthritis bit.

Apparently you lack the ability to sense sarcasm, which isn't surprising considering your average of 34 posts per day and 20,000 posts total, you don't get to communicate with real humans much I suppose.

Drbio
09-17-2003, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by: Shaq Attack2

Originally posted by: Drbio
I wouldn't expect Shaq Attackless2 to understand pulmonary embolism after that arthritis bit.

Apparently you lack the ability to sense sarcasm, which isn't surprising considering your average of 34 posts per day and 20,000 posts total, you don't get to communicate with real humans much I suppose.

Awww.....a personal attack for me? thanks. A laker fan took the time to personally attack me on a mavericks board. what a loser. Since you were so thoroughly undressed on the arthritis issue, I thought you just might want to impress us all with your knowledge on pulmonary embolisms too. I bet you have that as well.

Shaq Attack2
09-17-2003, 05:44 PM
Originally posted by: Drbio

Originally posted by: Shaq Attack2

Originally posted by: Drbio
I wouldn't expect Shaq Attackless2 to understand pulmonary embolism after that arthritis bit.

Apparently you lack the ability to sense sarcasm, which isn't surprising considering your average of 34 posts per day and 20,000 posts total, you don't get to communicate with real humans much I suppose.

Awww.....a personal attack for me? thanks. A laker fan took the time to personally attack me on a mavericks board. what a loser. Since you were so thoroughly undressed on the arthritis issue, I thought you just might want to impress us all with your knowledge on pulmonary embolisms too. I bet you have that as well.

Awww.....look who's attacking who now. Get out more.

Drbio
09-17-2003, 06:05 PM
I get out plenty moron. A laker fan mocking mavs fans on a mavs board is pretty pathetic though. I guess it still stings that we were better last year than you guys. Go ahead and troll away......it's the classic laker fan mentality that is recognized on every board in existence.

Is your embolism better? How is that arthritis thing going for you?

Shaq Attack2
09-17-2003, 07:54 PM
Originally posted by: Drbio
I get out plenty moron.

Of course you do. After all, how could you not with your 34+ posts per day.


A laker fan mocking mavs fans on a mavs board is pretty pathetic though.

LOL, that's classic. Reread this thread if you need to for clarification, but everything was going fine until you to just couldn't resist to instigate. Go ahead, pretend that you didn't start anything.


I guess it still stings that we were better last year than you guys.

Oh puhlease, back up bullcrap like that before you spout off.


Go ahead and troll away......it's the classic laker fan mentality that is recognized on every board in existence.

No, mostly you apparently, and probably routed from jealousy of the Lakers 3 titles in the last 4 years and 30+ point comeback during the regular season last year, extending the Mavs 10+ year Laker home losing streak.


How is that arthritis thing going for you?

Just fine, my meds and workout routine is taking good care of it. What was that about arthritis not being treatable? i/expressions/rolleye.gif

Drbio
09-17-2003, 08:29 PM
Such a moron.

Shaq Attack2
09-17-2003, 11:15 PM
Originally posted by: Drbio
Such a moron.

Predictable.

EricaLubarsky
09-18-2003, 01:50 AM
the fighting is getting annoying. Please be nice, guys.

OutletPass
09-18-2003, 02:07 AM
Jeremiah...just wanted to add one thing that I forgot to mention. Webber never reported the income that he has now admitted he received. That's called tax evasion.

Look at it from this standpoint for a second...

the grand jury is after Martin for the illegal lottery thing...Webber simply goes in and tells the truth to the grand jury about the payments he received....amends his tax returns and cuts a deal with the government to pay up (which he can easily do). The only law he's broken is the tax thing...and that gets taken care of. Pretty simple...and he can pay up for his father, too.

Instead he lies...and opens himself to obstruction of justice, perjury and tax evasion. That's 3 felonies.

Pretty stupid move, don't you think ?

Makes you wonder what kind of legal advice he was getting...and whether he completely ignored any good advice that he was getting.

Drbio
09-18-2003, 03:16 AM
She can't help it. Laker fans are wired that way.


OP- wouldn't it be aggravated perjury?

Drbio
09-18-2003, 03:17 AM
Originally posted by: Shaq Attack2

Originally posted by: Drbio
Such a moron.

Predictable.

Yes. Sadly, you are.

Shaq Attack2
09-18-2003, 06:15 AM
Originally posted by: Drbio

Originally posted by: Shaq Attack2

Originally posted by: Drbio
Such a moron.

Predictable.

Yes. Sadly, you are.

Haha, resorting to "I know you are, but what am I?" jokes? Are you 14? Get a life, I can't believe you waste so much time here with crap like this. You degrade the quality of this forum.

kg_veteran
09-18-2003, 08:40 AM
ShaqAttack, this is another spot where you'd be better off just bowing out gracefully.

OutletPass
09-18-2003, 10:32 AM
Actually no, Doc...

Perjury is a:
False declaration before grand jury - Title 18, United States Code, Section, 1623
5 years' imprisonment; $250,000 fine

Aggravated Perjury is a fairly new creation....under the Federal Immigration Laws...a whole new class of "aggravated" felonies came into being I believe, around 1988, under the Immigration Act and are only applicable under that Act.

See what I mean about what Webber did ? If he had told the truth and cut a deal on the tax issue and testified against Martin, he'd be home free. By lying, he opened himself up to the possibility of years in prison. In that one instant, he went from being a witness to being a defendant.

Totally stupid....

Shaq Attack2
09-18-2003, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by: kg_veteran
ShaqAttack, this is another spot where you'd be better off just bowing out gracefully.

No problem, I was done with this thread with that post.

Drbio
09-18-2003, 03:58 PM
Did you actually contribute spare attack? To be done with something implies you were contributing. All I've ever seen you post is crap here. You've attacked OP, MFFL, myself, and others and it always is the other persons fault? You are an ignorant fool.

Drbio
09-18-2003, 04:00 PM
Thanks for the clarification OP.


What about State law? Doesn't Texas delineate between perjury (making the false statement by several means) and aggravated perjury (making a false statement under oath)? I thought when Texas established that line of law that it was modelled on a federal statute. I'm sure I am mixing up the state and federal codes though.

OutletPass
09-18-2003, 11:41 PM
Doc...here are the definitions under the Texas Penal Code:

§ 37.02. Perjury
(a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to deceive and with knowledge of the statement's meaning:
(1) he makes a false statement under oath or swears to the truth of a false statement previously made and the statement is required or authorized by law to be made under oath; or
(2) he makes a false unsworn declaration under Chapter 132, Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.

§ 37.03. Aggravated Perjury
(a) A person commits an offense if he commits perjury as defined in Section 37.02, and the false statement:
(1) is made during or in connection with an official proceeding; and
(2) is material.
(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.

§ 37.04. Materiality
(a) A statement is material, regardless of the admissibility of the statement under the rules of evidence, if it could have affected the course or outcome of the official proceeding.
(b) It is no defense to prosecution under Section 37.03 (Aggravated Perjury) that the declarant mistakenly believed the statement to be immaterial.
(c) Whether a statement is material in a given factual situation is a question of law.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.

And here's the Federal Statute on Aggravated Perjury...(it's very, very similar, but can you tell the one difference in the "burden of proof" ?

Sec. 1623. False declarations before grand jury or court

STATUTE

(a) Whoever under oath (or in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code) in any proceeding before or ancillary to any court or grand jury of the United States knowingly makes any false material declaration or makes or uses any other information, including any book, paper, document, record, recording, or other material, knowing the same to contain any false material declaration, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

(b) This section is applicable whether the conduct occurred within or without the United States.

(c) An indictment or information for violation of this section alleging that, in any proceedings before or ancillary to any court or grand jury of the United States, the defendant under oath has knowingly made two or more declarations, which are inconsistent to the degree that one of them is necessarily false, need not specify which declaration is false if -

(1) each declaration was material to the point in question, and

(2) each declaration was made within the period of the statute of limitations for the offense charged under this section. In any prosecution under this section, the falsity of a declaration set forth in the indictment or information shall be established sufficient for conviction by proof that the defendant while under oath made irreconcilably contradictory declarations material to the point in question in any proceeding before or ancillary to any court or grand jury. It shall be a defense to an indictment or information made pursuant to the first sentence of this subsection that the defendant at the time he made each declaration believed the declaration was true.

(d) Where, in the same continuous court or grand jury proceeding in which a declaration is made, the person making the declaration admits such declaration to be false, such admission shall bar prosecution under this section if, at the time the admission is made, the declaration has not substantially affected the proceeding, or it has not become manifest that such falsity has been or will be exposed.

(e) Proof beyond a reasonable doubt under this section is sufficient for conviction. It shall not be necessary that such proof be made by any particular number of witnesses or by documentary or other type of evidence.

Note: I didn't mean to give the impression that aggravated perjury was confined to Immigration law. The explosion of new "aggravated felonies" was created by the Immigration Act and have given rise to another explosion in aggravated perjury cases. You'll find that a very high percentage of aggravated perjury cases have been tried as a result of the Immigration Act. Since 9/11, there's been a tidal wave of aggravated perjury cases as a result of deportation investigations by various federal grand juries.

OutletPass
09-19-2003, 12:29 AM
Originally posted by ME:

nd the Prosecutor didn't want to take the risk of losing a high profile case

Doc...the one little difference in the Federal Statute was one of many things that forced the prosecutor to plea the case. No prosecutor in his right mind wants to lose a high profile case; that's basically career suicide (as the Prosecutor's in O.J. Simpson's case found out).

I've been very strong about waiting to see the evidence in Kobe's case...I don't believe in pre-judging cases and I've been in the same camp as WOW as to all of the rumor mongering on both sides. I don't care for all that gossiping one bit. Let's just see what the evidence is.

But do take note of the prosecutor's actions as this case moves forward...if he gets favorable evidentiary rulings and keeps after this one (with his career on the line)...it'll indicate that he's got some pretty damning physical evidence. I won't pretend to know what will happen in front of the jury and the way that they'll look at all of the evidence and the testimony...just know that this guy is putting his career on the line, big time. He's either got something very big in his bag...or he's one stupid SOB.

Drbio
09-19-2003, 08:21 AM
Thanks OP.

LRB
09-21-2003, 03:24 PM
Originally posted by: OutletPass
Originally posted by ME:

nd the Prosecutor didn't want to take the risk of losing a high profile case

Doc...the one little difference in the Federal Statute was one of many things that forced the prosecutor to plea the case. No prosecutor in his right mind wants to lose a high profile case; that's basically career suicide (as the Prosecutor's in O.J. Simpson's case found out).

I've been very strong about waiting to see the evidence in Kobe's case...I don't believe in pre-judging cases and I've been in the same camp as WOW as to all of the rumor mongering on both sides. I don't care for all that gossiping one bit. Let's just see what the evidence is.

But do take note of the prosecutor's actions as this case moves forward...if he gets favorable evidentiary rulings and keeps after this one (with his career on the line)...it'll indicate that he's got some pretty damning physical evidence. I won't pretend to know what will happen in front of the jury and the way that they'll look at all of the evidence and the testimony...just know that this guy is putting his career on the line, big time. He's either got something very big in his bag...or he's one stupid SOB.

Don't ever remember anyone accusing SheWebb of being a genius. i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gifi/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif

Drbio
09-21-2003, 07:04 PM
LRB is a genius! Welcome back!

LRB
09-21-2003, 10:07 PM
Originally posted by: Drbio
LRB is a genius! Welcome back!


Thanks, Doc. Guess with training camp about to start, it was time to get the fingers back in shape for some more posting.
i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif

u2sarajevo
09-21-2003, 11:06 PM
Originally posted by: LRB

Originally posted by: Drbio
LRB is a genius! Welcome back!


Thanks, Doc. Guess with training camp about to start, it was time to get the fingers back in shape for some more posting.
i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif

I think you heard through the grapevine that MFFL was only 1000 posts from being the next guru and you wanted to pose as a challenge to him. i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

OutletPass
09-22-2003, 12:33 AM
LRB...

Big Man ...you are getting a PM from me.

Jeremiah
09-22-2003, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by: OutletPass
Jeremiah...just wanted to add one thing that I forgot to mention. Webber never reported the income that he has now admitted he received. That's called tax evasion.

Look at it from this standpoint for a second...

the grand jury is after Martin for the illegal lottery thing...Webber simply goes in and tells the truth to the grand jury about the payments he received....amends his tax returns and cuts a deal with the government to pay up (which he can easily do). The only law he's broken is the tax thing...and that gets taken care of. Pretty simple...and he can pay up for his father, too.

Instead he lies...and opens himself to obstruction of justice, perjury and tax evasion. That's 3 felonies.

Pretty stupid move, don't you think ?

Makes you wonder what kind of legal advice he was getting...and whether he completely ignored any good advice that he was getting.

When you put it that way, then yes, it does look like he wasn't thinking very clearly: either in hiring counsel or listening to counsel.

I think of the obstruction of justice charge (and sentencing parameters) for lying to a federal grand jury as a safety net for the government. The government adds the charge in the event that the defendant is acquitted of the more serious charges, as it is theoretically simpler to prove the lesser charge, but the kicker is that the lesser charge still carries with it a harsh penalty. Obstruction of justice is an offense that should have harsh penalties in some cases, in my opinion, like a capital crime. One shouldn't have to go to jail for lying though.

I'm smart enough to know that my opinion stems from my dislike of the sentencing protocols within the federal, state, county and city governments. From what I know about them, I don't like them because they are arbitrary, cost-effective in comparison to the alternative, but arbitrary, and therefore, unfair. Obstruction of justice in and of itself isn't something one ought to partake in, though the penalty parameters don't fit the crime in my eyes. Of course, I'm also smart enough to know that there are probably other issues that go along with sentencing that I haven't considered, and couldn't, until they were in front of me.

I don't quite think it's a big problem that Webber was sentenced to community service and that his record might be expunged. His infraction, in the context of the charge, is minor in my eyes. But perhaps I don't know enough about it to make that conclusion.