John William

this is so funny, god bless louise lucas, Hero of the Commonwealth

Yes

That said, I don't have high confidence the court will dismiss the DL case on papers, the court might think these are jury questions, in which case I think this is a trial that can be won/loss on jury instructions. Lemon would benefit if he was tried alongside some of the others, for contrast.

Bingo. This is one of those times where (although I'm an ADA) I knew little about press protections from crim liability, but you can just intuit that the 1A probably protects all parts of legit news gathering that doesn't clearly show separate intent to break the law. It's just common sense.

2 ....A prosecutor would need to prove Lemon engaged in affirmative conduct that showed intent to further the unlawful objective. I relied on other cases to support the other assertions I made but those are the SCOTUS/circuit court opinions that lay the foundation for the rest.

1 From Branzburg v Hayes, Zerilli v Smith &, Silkwood v Kerr-McGee I strung together the argument that gathering news in close proximity to unlawful activity doesn't transform a journalist into a criminal participant...

I disagree. I think Lemon has a strong 1A defense. My analysis:

www.facebook.com/share/p/17Uf...

Is this confirmed?

I'm guessing his union would normally defend him but they would need outside counsel for murder/manslaughter.

But MN would get some DOJ discovery when moved to fed court. Narrowly tailored to the SCI issue, but that's not nothing. Discovery pertaining to scope of authority and necessary and proper (reasonableness of agent's actions).

Right. I found out about Touhy from you. I have never heard of it before (not my area of practice--I'm strictly a NYC prosecutor).

4/ Lastly, although Neagle ultimately controls, there is a lot of civil caselaw in the 8th circuit (incl MN) that is partially binding, esp re reasonableness/officer created risk/escalation. Would welcome your thoughts. Personally I think MN has an excellent case to make on numerous grounds.

3/ This could unduly prejudice Ross who bears no fault in that obstruction. DOJ has no Brady obligation in a MN trial. DOJ might want to provide Brady since they would be invested in an ACQ. But it does not strike me as fair that the state pros appear to have been negligent in their investigation.

2/ Should Hennepin defeat SCI and go forward w/ a criminal prosecution without that file, which presumably would include the car--they have more than enough evidence for a prima fascia case right now--could the pros inform the jury that key evidence that they would normally see was withheld by DOJ?

1/ Two thoughts: should Trump's DOJ permanently refuse to share its investigative files w/Hennepin Co and Good's civil atty, it is possible that if an ethical POTUS succeed DT that DOJ could release the files/revive the investigation and share it. No Sol for murder. 2nd thought:

If ICE Agent Ross stands trial in MN court for killing Renee Good, a hypothetical cross-examination: www.facebook.com/share/p/1TrS...

They can always supersede based on any new evidence they receive. But I doubt the theory of the case is going to change much.

If they can win SCI, they could even wait until there is a new POTUS who will turn over the FBI file if Moriarty can't get it from Trump DOJ. No SoL obviously.

He told you he would do this while his balz were slappin yr chin Joey

A summation a prosecutor might make in a hypothetical state prosecution of Agent Ross, Part I

www.facebook.com/share/1DezPb...

If MN wasn't quite able to confirm Ross's rounds killed her. I think it's a pretty strong inference. More I think, I think MN is probably good there. So my question for Mary Moriarty and Keith Ellison is: what are you waiting for?

Who else would have done Renee's autopsy? Gotta be the state. ICE just threw her body out on the sidewalk like she was recycling IIRC.

But this is critical. I think the GJ judge when reviewing minutes might give MN some leeway--especially in light of FBI dirty hands....

The point is, the feds don't have, can't have, M.E.'s in every city and town in the 50 states, so it's practical. This is why there was actual controversy when the feds whisked JFK's body to DC before the Dallas ME could do the autopsy. They were pissed! They knew they had jurisdiction.

3. You can probably tell I did nothing but grand jury work for a year and a half early in my career. This was the kind of shit we sweated all the time. Ah, the prosecutor's life--love it.

2. I know it might seem obvious to everyone in the world that the bullets from Ross's gun were the cause of death. But I'm not sure the state can rely on the videos and nothing else to establish P.C. Maybe they could rely on rational inference from vids? M.E. testimony in GJ very important now. Hm.

1. OK, I thought the case was remanded to state court if the state prevailed on SCI. POSNY v Trump.

But I thought of something else: Hennepin will need something more for an indictment, more than what I said earlier. They will need to confirm that Ross's shots were the cause of death.

I agree with you on Touhy request, but I think MN has everything it needs for an indictment. I've indicted Murder 2 with no more than that.

If they win SCI and it goes back to state court for trial, I have to assume MN is going to be able to get the rest of the files and physical evidence.

Narrow questioning focused strictly on:
scope of authority, necessity and propriety of conduct
Can't get:
Wholesale investigative files.

Fair enough.

3. Then, with the videos and Becca's testimony I think they have enough for probable cause. Once indicted they go to fed court for SCI litigation. As per Touhy, Hennepin can get:
Sworn declarations from federal agents
Limited evidentiary hearings
In camera review of select documents

2. I am satisfied that Epstein committed suicide.

But for an indictment, if it works in MN like it does in NY, they will need the M.E.'s death certificate and testimony from an officer who saw Renee's body at the scene and at the M.E. and can say it is the same person.

1. According to nationwide protocol, the local M.E. should have performed it. The feds to not have general police or coroner powers, even when a death implicates federal law.

This is why the New York City OCME performed Jeffery Epstein autopsy. The M.E. who supervised it is a friend which is why