4 ms·

If you want a primary source, I recommend reading https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wied.111629/gov.uscourts.wied.111629.1.0.pdf https://stor

by xpe 2y ago

If you want a primary source, I recommend reading https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wied.111629/gov.uscourts.wied.111629.1.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wied.11... In particular, part D: "Judge DUGAN escorts Flores-Ruiz through a “jury door” to avoid his arrest."

slaw 2y ago
I hope Judge Dugan will be trialed as a regular citizen.
- int_19h 2y ago
  I hope the jury will nullify. It does indeed look like she broke the law, but it was the right thing to do.
Aeolun 2y ago
Not necessarily to avoid his arrest, only the fact they went through a jury door is indicated for now.
- dionian 2y ago
  It would be interesting to hear if there was another valid reason for this
  - Miner49er 2y ago
    There doesn't have to be, it's up to the prosecution to prove the reason was to aid him in avoiding arrest. The judge doesn't have to provide an alternate reason.
    - foldr 2y ago
      I’m not trying to defend this arrest, but that’s not really how it works. If there’s an obvious illegal motivation for doing X and the person who did X can’t supply a plausible alternative explanation, then a jury may conclude that X was done with the illegal motivation. Say that I take an item from a store. That’s only a crime if I did it with the intent of stealing it. But the prosecution doesn’t really have to “prove” in any practical sense that I had that intention. If I don’t have a plausible story about why else I did it, then I’ll probably be found guilty.
      - Aeolun 2y ago
        > then a jury may conclude that X was done with the illegal motivation I think the whole point of a jury trial is that a jury may conclude absolutely anything, regardless of evidence presented.
        foldr 2y ago
        Yes, exactly. And that means that trying to be a smart ass (I had a perfectly cromulent motive for doing it but I’m not going to tell you what it is and you have to prove I didn’t – nyah!) isn’t likely to be a very effective defense.
- nonethewiser 2y ago
  That's a quote from the complaint against her. It hasnt been tried yet. Read the document. The agents showed up to arrest Flores-Ruiz. The agents complied with the courtroom deputy to wait until after the proceeding and the deputy agreed to help with the arrest. They waited outside the courtroom at the deputy's request since it was a public space and they didnt have a warrent to enter the jury chamber. The judge was alerted of the officers and approached them and told them to leave. She directed them to go meet with another judge about the matter. She personally lead Flores-Ruiz out through the jury room. All this stuff appears to be corroborated by witnesses. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wied.111629/gov.uscourts.wied.111629.1.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wied.11...
  - Aeolun 2y ago
    Yeah, I read the whole thing. What an absolutely atrocious format for reading though. Makes you wonder why they bother to digitize it at all…

by xpe 2y ago

slaw 2y ago

I hope Judge Dugan will be trialed as a regular citizen.

int_19h 2y ago
I hope the jury will nullify. It does indeed look like she broke the law, but it was the right thing to do.

Aeolun 2y ago

Not necessarily to avoid his arrest, only the fact they went through a jury door is indicated for now.

dionian 2y ago
It would be interesting to hear if there was another valid reason for this
- Miner49er 2y ago
  There doesn't have to be, it's up to the prosecution to prove the reason was to aid him in avoiding arrest. The judge doesn't have to provide an alternate reason.
  - foldr 2y ago
    I’m not trying to defend this arrest, but that’s not really how it works. If there’s an obvious illegal motivation for doing X and the person who did X can’t supply a plausible alternative explanation, then a jury may conclude that X was done with the illegal motivation. Say that I take an item from a store. That’s only a crime if I did it with the intent of stealing it. But the prosecution doesn’t really have to “prove” in any practical sense that I had that intention. If I don’t have a plausible story about why else I did it, then I’ll probably be found guilty.
    - Aeolun 2y ago
      > then a jury may conclude that X was done with the illegal motivation I think the whole point of a jury trial is that a jury may conclude absolutely anything, regardless of evidence presented.
      - foldr 2y ago
        Yes, exactly. And that means that trying to be a smart ass (I had a perfectly cromulent motive for doing it but I’m not going to tell you what it is and you have to prove I didn’t – nyah!) isn’t likely to be a very effective defense.
nonethewiser 2y ago
That's a quote from the complaint against her. It hasnt been tried yet. Read the document. The agents showed up to arrest Flores-Ruiz. The agents complied with the courtroom deputy to wait until after the proceeding and the deputy agreed to help with the arrest. They waited outside the courtroom at the deputy's request since it was a public space and they didnt have a warrent to enter the jury chamber. The judge was alerted of the officers and approached them and told them to leave. She directed them to go meet with another judge about the matter. She personally lead Flores-Ruiz out through the jury room. All this stuff appears to be corroborated by witnesses. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wied.111629/gov.uscourts.wied.111629.1.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wied.11...
- Aeolun 2y ago
  Yeah, I read the whole thing. What an absolutely atrocious format for reading though. Makes you wonder why they bother to digitize it at all…