Where are the rumors about "sealed indictments" being generated?

Why are motions filed with the indictment of "Scooter" being characterized as "sealed indictments"?

:shrug:

Just curious.

There are no sealed indictments. Bank on that.

No, I wouldn't like it.

What makes you think I would? Or rather, under what aggressive and insulting principle do you claim the right to attack me thusly?

I have also noted your passion for attacking alternative independent news sources.

Is it just hopeless bitterness? :shrug:

And, so far, I've been correct. Note that. The "hopeless bitterness" turns out correct, while the "alternative news source" turns out to be spinning bullshit. Strange, that.

;)

:thumbsup:

handed up on Friday, there were some other papers in an envelope. The judge referred to them in the courtroom as motions. No one had been able to answer the question of what they could possibly be. Even CNN's legal analysts including Toobin could not provide an explanation for what they might be, and even stated that they had never seen something like that happen before.

I have been trying to google for the answer in the last half and hour and cannot find one. What I did find out is that indictments are sealed by the judge, not the grand jury and that this is done so that the defendant does not receive a heads up until a warrant has been issued and he is placed in custody.

I know we have a couple of lawyers around here, or at least they describe themselves as so. But no one seems to be willing to answer the question.

I mean, geez, although I quit the practice because I determined myself ill-suited to it, Toobin seems disturbingly lacking in foresight.

Fitz could have filed motions pertaining to extending grand jury secrecy obligations (which would be imperative when continuing an investigation) or in relation to sealing the evidence received to date or with respect to the protection of certain witnesses.

It doesn't take a helluva' lot of imagination and foresight to create numerous guesses about the motions filed. Why on earth people would jump on "sealed indictments" rather than the range of possibilities makes me wonder?

I'm just wondering where the rumors are being generated. That's all.

Can a grand jury submit motions? I don't know?

,...submitting the motions as law-finder. The GJ decides on indictment(s) as fact-finders.

They mentioned it on CNN, then changed the subject. Apparently some motions were filed prior to the indictments being handed up. Sometimes sealed indictments are filed as motions, rather than indictments that are read then and there.

Nobody knows for certain what those motions were. Although much like sealed indictments, their contents are known only to the GJ, the Prosecutor and the Magistrate Judge.

sealed indictments being filed as motions? I cannot find any data. Thanks.

i watched it and everyone on cnn was surprised !!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5227694&mesg_id=5228018

The indictments would be handed to the judge together with a motion by the prosecutor to seal them.

An indictment is the formal document charging someone with a crime.

A motion is a separate document that asks a court to take some action with respect to a case that is before it.

I cannot think of another reason for any motion to be handed to the judge other than the sealing of indictments. If the motion was with respect to the assignment of the case for trial, as some have speculated, the defendant would be entitled to know about it and such a motion would have to be made public.

If the prosecutor wanted the indictment sealed, he would formally make a motion or a request of the court that they be sealed and provide his reasoning.

That is why is has been suggested that the motions filed with the indictment of Scooter pertain to sealed indictments. That and the fact that Roverboy's attorneys have admitted that they provided 11th hour information to Fitz in an effort to protect their client from prosecution. :hi:

Do you know what you are talking about? If so, please provide references.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5227694

Review the posts in the thread, esp. #43.

Enlighten us -- is it legally possible for some mysterious motion to be a sealed indictment? Or is it out of the question.

,...there is a distinction between a motion and a sealed indictment; they are appropriately characterized by our courts as one or the other.

Moreover, it appears Fitz filed motionS (in the plural) and they could ALL simply be related to protecting the evidence accumulated to date (eg the expired grand jurors are prohibited from discussing the case, the evidence acquired is preserved, and stuff like that).

I don't understand why the pundits are unable to grasp such possibilities,...unless they are making big bucks off being incompetent corporate mouthpieces,...which wouldn't surprise me, at all.

Hell, I didn't even practice much criminal law and have a wee bit more imagination than the "experts" spouting off on CM (and making so goshdamn much money offering their shallow views).

So the time to file motions related to that business was that particular court session.

http://www.wboc.com/Global/story.asp?S=4037728&nav=QEMt

CBS News chief White House correspondent John Roberts reports that Fitzgerald was not asking for a grand jury extension during his meeting with the federal judge, leaving people to wonder whether he was seeking sealed indictments, or something else.

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-10-26T163846Z_01_SIB471053_RTRUKOC_0_UK-BUSH-LEAK1.xml&archived=False

Any charges brought by the grand jury could be sealed, preventing a public announcement by the court or the prosecutor until possibly on Thursday or Friday, when the panel is scheduled to expire. No announcement was expected on Wednesday, an administration official said.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=5220608

If it's sources you're looking for, this was the first report of these supposed sealed indictments I remember reading. My thought at the time was along the lines of "consider the source" (NOT meaning the poster of the thread). Since then, the story seems to have gained legs, but then, things tend to do that on the "internets" sometimes.

and specifically as related to those mysterious "extra papers" that were supposedly with Scooter/Scooby-Do's indictment, but I can't remember where I read it. If I can remember where I saw it, I'll post that for you, too. As I recall, it wasn't a very credible source, IMO. I would've saved a link to it otherwise, and I don't have one, so...

I don't like either of those guys, either.

(see Joolz's posts for the reference), I still haven't heard one thing that proves to me that there was NOT a sealed indictment!

Fitz would've been prohibited from mentioning a sealed indictment to anyone. That's the federal rules.

guesses and not rumors.

No one knows what motions were filed with the court and the entire grand jury proceedings are secretive and Fitz has done a tremendous job of following the rules and protecting the secrecy of the proceedings (and preventing leaks), therefore anything about the motions and/or the proceedings at this stage are guesses, imho.