In a world where everything awful is vying for our attention, it’s easy to lose track of what’s still happening with the Flynn case. Luckily, Jonathan Turley was good enough to put together a thread on the gross abuse of power that is taking place behind the scenes.
Take a look at this:
In the Flynn case, Gleeson just declared Flynn now guilty of perjury but "I respectfully recommend … that the Court not exercise that authority. Rather, it should take Flynn's perjury into account in sentencing him on the offense to which he has already admitted guilty…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 10, 2020
What the?
…so let's unpack this. A criminal defendant alleges that he was coerced into a plea and claims innocence. Gleeson recommends not trying him on perjury but effectively punishing him for perjury under the plea that he said was coerced…https://t.co/CyGIcm4OVA
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 10, 2020
This is nuts.
…so the court would first send a defendant to jail on a crime that prosecutors now say he did not commit and punish him for the audacity of claiming innocence by joining the prosecutors in seeking a dismissal. It would be a nightmare for criminal defendants and counsel …
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 10, 2020
They want him jailed for a crime he didn’t commit and they want the crime they claim he did commit to be ignored.
Right?
Don’t look at us, man, we just work here.
…any criminal defendant could face punishment for perjury is raising coercion in seeking dismissal, even when the prosecutors agreed with him. Yet, Gleeson states this
"aligns with the Court's intent to treat this case and this Defendant, in the same way it would any other."— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 10, 2020
Recommended
With all due respect, it sounds like Gleeson is full of crap.
I have to note one other chilling statement from Gleeson: "A false eleventh-hour disavowal of a plea and a trumped-up accusation of government misconduct constitute obstruction of the administration of justice." I admit to viewing such matters as a criminal defense lawyer but…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 10, 2020
Chilling indeed.
…this is breathtaking. Imagine if this standard were applied generally. Judges could refuse to let defendants out of cases even when prosecutors admitted fault and supported the accused. Judges could just declare it all "trump-up" and demand that a person be sent to jail…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 10, 2020
Terrifying.
…on charges that the prosecution no longer supports. Gleeson believes that that is a "return to regularity." I have been a criminal defense attorney for 30 years and I do not know where that is a regular practice. It would allow courts to become a self-contained…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 10, 2020
If this is a return to regularity perhaps irregular is the way to go.
Wait, that didn’t come out right.
And neither did that.
Heh.
…and self-mandating system — merging the roles of the prosecutor and the court. The court even went outside of the case to bring in third parties to argue positions neither party supports. That is about as "regular" as a drum-head field trial in the federal courtyard.
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) June 10, 2020
What he said.
***
Related:
Join the conversation as a VIP Member