The unbelievable Cunningscam defense.
By on Feb 11th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
The unbelievable Cunningscam defense.
Lawyers for Brent Wilkes are arguing that the former defense contractor never bribed former congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham, “knew nothing about any money laundering schemes, and can’t be sentenced to the 60 years in prison.” Their reasoning? Although it seems like an “obvious fact,” they claim that a jury never explicitly concluded that “Cunningham was an elected official.” (Proof of this fact here.)
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Hoffman
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Bush wasn’t elected either.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:12 pmI guess when you’re desperate, brazen measures seem reasonable. A consequence of that desperation, I guess, is that you lose all perspective of how silly your brazen measures make you look.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:17 pmin other news, clyde barrow wasn’t robbing banks, he was making unauthorized withdrawls
February 11th, 2008 at 3:18 pmSo, they’re basically conceeding the bribery part of “bribery of an elected official?” How Rovian.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:19 pmlol. I was a criminal defense atty for 20 years and retired. And when you handle those appeals, you gotta do what you do. Made any number of arguments where I even laughed at myself. Hysterically, some of them won.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:20 pmI guess when the Hague Trials of Bush and Cheney come around in ‘09 their defense will be, “Bush and Cheney were never elected into office”.
Bush/Cheney
Hague Trials ‘09
Buck Fush
February 11th, 2008 at 3:21 pmAh, yes, the old
The jury is a bunch of morons defense…
February 11th, 2008 at 3:24 pmSo… are they trying to claim that Cunningham was NOT an elected official?
robbez called it. “How Rovian”.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:25 pmLawyering 101 – get it dismissed on a procedural basis.
Lawyering 102 – send a bunch of yelling, screaming GOP kids down to Florida election boards to clog the halls and threaten officials.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:27 pmIt is an element of the offense. The real questions should be: (1) Did the prosecution submit any evidence that Cunningham was an elected official? (2) Was the jury required to make a specific finding of fact concerning that issue? It would be a nice way for a Republican US Atty to help out. “Oh, I just forgot to submit the evidence on that element.”
February 11th, 2008 at 3:30 pmI think it’s called “judicial notice” which allows a court to allow facts as plain as the nose on your face to be introduced into evidence.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:33 pmwhat a bunch of blood-sucking crooks. lock em up!
February 11th, 2008 at 3:33 pmNo offense TP, this post sucks. Let me post something important.
The World’s Rubbish Dump: A Garbage Tip That Stretches From Hawaii to Japan
A “plastic soup†of waste floating in the Pacific Ocean is growing at an alarming rate and now covers an area twice the size of the continental United States, scientists have said.
The vast expanse of debris – in effect the world’s largest rubbish dump – is held in place by swirling underwater currents. This drifting “soup†stretches from about 500 nautical miles off the Californian coast, across the northern Pacific, past Hawaii and almost as far as Japan.
…Marcus Eriksen, a research director of the US-based Algalita Marine Research Foundation,“The original idea that people had was that it was an island of plastic garbage that you could almost walk on. It is not quite like that. It is almost like a plastic soup. It is endless for an area that is maybe twice the size as continental United States.â€
Curtiis Ebbesmeyer, an oceanographer,…compares the trash vortex to a living entity: “It moves around like a big animal without a leash.†When that animal comes close to land, as it does at the Hawaiian archipelago, the results are dramatic. “The garbage patch barfs, and you get a beach covered with this confetti of plastic,†he added.
…modern plastics are so durable that objects half-a-century old have been found in the north Pacific dump. “Every little piece of plastic manufactured in the past 50 years that made it into the ocean is still out there somewhere,†said Tony Andrady, a chemist with the US-based Research Triangle Institute.
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/02/05/6856/
February 11th, 2008 at 3:33 pmWelcome to bizarro world occupied by Republiscums.
What will they think of next?
February 11th, 2008 at 3:34 pmJMOHR, forgive my ignorance of the finer points of law, but is it really necessary for a jury to establish the fact that someone is an elected official?
I mean, can’t one rely on, y’know, the public record to establish that fact if it is a consideration in sentencing?
February 11th, 2008 at 3:35 pmInteresting that Cunningham only got sentenced to 8 years. Rather odd that the “temptee” was given far fewer years than the “temptor.” Or in another recent decision, the soldier who shot and killed an unarmed Iraqi was charged with murder in the 2nd degree and sentenced to 10 years. While the sergent that ordered him to shoot the Iraqi and then placed a weapon next to the body to facilitate the coverup got off with a demotion and a reprimand.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:38 pmCan anyone here prove Duke Cunningham even exists?
February 11th, 2008 at 3:42 pmResponse to Comment 15: Yes, you have to prove each element of an offense. You can ask the judge to take judicial notice that Cunningham was an elected member of congress at the time the offenses occurred. However, the jury must still be presented with that fact. I remember defending cases as a young attorney when I would catch an inexperienced prosecutor forgetting to establish a very simple element. It was alwas unnerving to hit them on a request for directed verdict at the end of their case. They would then have to reopen and prove the fact.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:45 pmComment by 2MillionLightYearsToAndromeda — February 11, 2008 @ 3:33 pm
It’s truly amazing how completely destructive the human race is. We are such a new species and haven’t been around too long (and according to some Christian circles only about 4,000 years!) yet have managed to muck up the oceans, the atmosphere and generally degraded the environment to the extent that many specifies of other life forms on this planet have either been completely eliminated or will be in a short time. All things considered, perhaps it’s time for another flood or something.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:46 pmHere we have yet another example of the ol’ Sgt. Schultz “I-know-nothing” model used as an excuse for the terrible government we are seeing.
A lie, no matter how many times it is told, is still a lie.
A lie, no matter how many people you tell it to, is still a lie.
These people are sooooo stuuuuupid they out to be put out of their misery. A big round of the “Blue Juice” for them all! Make it a double for Brent and the Duke!
February 11th, 2008 at 3:48 pmThanks for that explanation, JMOHR.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:49 pmComment by 2MillionLightYearsToAndromeda — February 11, 2008 @ 3:33 pm
It’s truly amazing how completely destructive the human race is…
Comment by impeachcheneythenbush — February 11, 2008 @ 3:46 pm
I’ve come to the conclusion that homo sapiens is a failed species. We’re about to destroy ourselves through war or ignorance. The planet will be better off without us. Something better will evolve in a billion years. It’ll be like we were never here.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:50 pm…a jury never explicitly concluded that “Cunningham was an elected official.
The Supreme Court never explicitly concluded that George W. Bush was an elected official.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:51 pmi don’t think it’s possible, even theoretically, to be less honest than a republican.
February 11th, 2008 at 3:57 pmi don’t think it’s possible, even theoretically, to be less honest than a republican.
Comment by tombaker — February 11, 2008 @ 3:57 pm
What about being a Republican’s defense attorney?
February 11th, 2008 at 4:07 pmThis reminds me of the “opposite day” sketch by “The whitest kids you know”….
Look it up on the youtubes. it’s funny as heck.
February 11th, 2008 at 4:18 pmSo money laundering is OK as long as it doesn’t involve an elected official? What?
February 11th, 2008 at 4:24 pmi don’t think it’s possible, even theoretically, to be less honest than a republican.
Comment by tombaker — February 11, 2008 @ 3:57 pm
What about being a Republican’s defense attorney?
Comment by toasterhead — February 11, 2008 @ 4:07 pm
Their defense attorneys have to stay at least honest enough not to be disbarred, putting them at least one, albeit small, cut above R’s themselves.
February 11th, 2008 at 5:00 pmWhen I read this the picture that came to my mind is of a man standing on the stern of the Titanic firing off a rescue flare.
February 11th, 2008 at 5:21 pmI’m surprised that Jury members haven’t pulled out a gun and peppered the defendents bench with a spray of bullets and then said what does that fool have in mind telling us that load of horse manure for.
Maybe thats why I don’t get selected?
February 11th, 2008 at 7:14 pmLet’s see if I have this right. Duke Cunningham served in office for 14 years as an elected official but the jurors didn’t know it. Just why was Duke signing Bills as a Congressmen from California. Now if any Judge buys this bull we will know the Bush appointed Judges are protecting the criminals for the White House.
February 11th, 2008 at 7:56 pmWhat they didn’t use the “IOKIYAR” or “it’s Clintons fault” defense???
February 11th, 2008 at 10:00 pmYes, you have to prove each element of an offense. You can ask the judge to take judicial notice that Cunningham was an elected member of congress at the time the offenses occurred. However, the jury must still be presented with that fact. I remember defending cases as a young attorney when I would catch an inexperienced prosecutor forgetting to establish a very simple element. It was alwas unnerving to hit them on a request for directed verdict at the end of their case. They would then have to reopen and prove the fact.
Comment by JMOHR
No offense JMOHR, but everyone can see why lawyers are a hated breed. The requirement to have to prove obvious things is stupid on its face, forget looking at how many jury hours and gazillions of dollars it takes to prove the obvious. The reason we are in this pickle with the traitor-in-chief is all because of lawyers. Lawyers need to stick up for the country and its rule of law. Getting that ridiculous is probably because some sniveling little slimy lawyer once got someone off on the “fact” that the other side never proved that the defendant existed.
February 11th, 2008 at 10:29 pmAnd now every lawyer just has to perform these perfuntory ridiculous notions. It is beyond wasteful.
.
Whats next?
The defense will claim that the court never proved that he was born?
.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:18 am