We Know What Day It Is. Do The Legal Teams?
Today, April 17th, is the prosecution’s self imposed deadline to respond to the defendant’s Bill of Particulars. When the government missed the first deadline on March 13th, defense argued that they had conceded. Prosecution shot back saying no harm was caused to the defense while also asking for an extension.
And perhaps this is as good a time as any to point out to the prosecution a small typo in that filing: On page 1, bullet number two should read, “On November 19, 2008 the grand jury returned….” not “On November 19, 2009…”
And the defense is having problems with dates, too. On the front page of the Bill of Particulars, they note the April 24th scheduled hearing before Judge Weisberg as occuring on April 27th. Let’s see if the defense shows up for their own hearing.
This case has already ripened for nearly three years without much activity, so let’s try and keep the dates straight and not add any more unnecessary confusion.
The defense’s motion for a Bill of Particulars argues that the prosecution’s charges are too vague to defend against. Since the government claims that there were overt acts of conspiracy, the burden rests on the government to show the particulars acts in which any defendant participated. The defense team maintains that not only does this allow them to mount an adequate defense, but also protects the defendants from double jeopardy.
The government’s answers will give us a clue as to how much information they already put forward vs. how much they are holding back. It should also provide a pretty clear road map for how the government will prosecute the case in court, that is whenever Judge Weisberg gets around to setting that date.
Mike Scarcella at the Legal Times is the go-to-guy on legal manuevers between the government and defense, so we hope to see more from him when the government responds to the defense’s motion.
— posted by David