3 ms·

Adding to twoodfin's comment: Grand Jury sessions are not meant to be trials, and do not consider whether a felony allegation can be proved "beyond a reasonabl

by emkemp 14y ago

Adding to twoodfin's comment: Grand Jury sessions are not meant to be trials, and do not consider whether a felony allegation can be proved "beyond a reasonable doubt." Instead they address whether there is "probable cause" that a felony has occurred.

pvaldes 14y ago
I'm not familiarised with the laws in your country, but I CAN see from here how the history sucks in large ammounts I copy here a few more notes written about this case: "Note that after six years of investigation and who knows how many taxpayer dollars down the hole, the DOJ is neither charging Nancy with harassing any whale on October 12, 2005, or any date since then. The indictment does not even allege that Nancy harassed any whale" (http://www.nancyblacklegaldefense.org/charges.htm http://www.nancyblacklegaldefense.org/charges.htm) Uh oh, "Ortiz boy/girl" in charge, you are shorting of ideas, think quickly... Thanks god, whe have the 1001! "When federal prosecutors can't muster enough evidence to bring charges against a person suspected of a crime, they can still use a controversial law to get a conviction anyway: They charge the person with lying. The law against lying--known in legal circles simply as "1001"--makes it a crime to knowingly make a material false statement in matters of federal jurisdiction. Critics across the political spectrum argue that 1001, a widely used statute in the federal criminal code, is open to abuse. It is charged hundreds of times a year..." ...Nancy Black, a marine biologist and operator of whale-watching boats, recently became ensnared by 1001. When one of her boat captains whistled at a humpback whale that approached the boat a few years ago, regulators investigated whether the incident constituted harassment of a whale, which is illegal. This past January (2012), Ms. Black was charged in the case--not with whale harassment, but with lying about the incident. She also faces a charge of illegally altering a video of the whale encounter, as well as unrelated allegations involving whale blubber. Together, the charges carry up to 20 years in prison. She denies all wrongdoing, including lying..." This is is taken from an article in the Wall Street Journal about the aplication of 1001 to targets like Nancy when all other charges failed... ("For feds lying is a handy charge, Emshwiller and Fields)". I strongly recommend its complete lecture to all interested in the Aaron's case. It is terrifying. "...the law is so vague that harmless misstatements can be turned into federal felonies." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303299604577328102223038294.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230329960457732... link to the PDF (in case the other link fails) http://www.nancyblacklegaldefense.org/For%20Feds,%20%27Lying%27%20Is%20a%20Handy%20Charge%20-%20WSJ.pdf http://www.nancyblacklegaldefense.org/For%20Feds,%20%27Lying... In short: This IS a shame, to ask 20 years for "edit a video" is indecent, abusive and ridiculous, and somebody had to say it. I hope never, ever, to have a law like this in my own country. To me, It's like a sort of legal torture to crush a target and force a confession, even from innocent people, and must be stopped.

by emkemp 14y ago

pvaldes 14y ago

I'm not familiarised with the laws in your country, but I CAN see from here how the history sucks in large ammounts I copy here a few more notes written about this case: "Note that after six years of investigation and who knows how many taxpayer dollars down the hole, the DOJ is neither charging Nancy with harassing any whale on October 12, 2005, or any date since then. The indictment does not even allege that Nancy harassed any whale" (http://www.nancyblacklegaldefense.org/charges.htm http://www.nancyblacklegaldefense.org/charges.htm) Uh oh, "Ortiz boy/girl" in charge, you are shorting of ideas, think quickly... Thanks god, whe have the 1001! "When federal prosecutors can't muster enough evidence to bring charges against a person suspected of a crime, they can still use a controversial law to get a conviction anyway: They charge the person with lying. The law against lying--known in legal circles simply as "1001"--makes it a crime to knowingly make a material false statement in matters of federal jurisdiction. Critics across the political spectrum argue that 1001, a widely used statute in the federal criminal code, is open to abuse. It is charged hundreds of times a year..." ...Nancy Black, a marine biologist and operator of whale-watching boats, recently became ensnared by 1001. When one of her boat captains whistled at a humpback whale that approached the boat a few years ago, regulators investigated whether the incident constituted harassment of a whale, which is illegal. This past January (2012), Ms. Black was charged in the case--not with whale harassment, but with lying about the incident. She also faces a charge of illegally altering a video of the whale encounter, as well as unrelated allegations involving whale blubber. Together, the charges carry up to 20 years in prison. She denies all wrongdoing, including lying..." This is is taken from an article in the Wall Street Journal about the aplication of 1001 to targets like Nancy when all other charges failed... ("For feds lying is a handy charge, Emshwiller and Fields)". I strongly recommend its complete lecture to all interested in the Aaron's case. It is terrifying. "...the law is so vague that harmless misstatements can be turned into federal felonies." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303299604577328102223038294.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230329960457732... link to the PDF (in case the other link fails) http://www.nancyblacklegaldefense.org/For%20Feds,%20%27Lying%27%20Is%20a%20Handy%20Charge%20-%20WSJ.pdf http://www.nancyblacklegaldefense.org/For%20Feds,%20%27Lying... In short: This IS a shame, to ask 20 years for "edit a video" is indecent, abusive and ridiculous, and somebody had to say it. I hope never, ever, to have a law like this in my own country. To me, It's like a sort of legal torture to crush a target and force a confession, even from innocent people, and must be stopped.