Jasmine wrote:Everyone knows about the audits. The sheriff's wasn't the only one that made the news. His was the only one that ended up as a witch hunt. Nolan's lawyer could have presented the facts about anything misleading and let a jury decide the creditability of the testimony. Guilty or not the judge has tainted the outcome.
Jasmine, would it be fair to anyone if a case was tried where facts were previously established, that the basis of the charge could not be proven?
Putting the question of Nolan's innocence or guilt aside, it's incumbant on the State to prove his guilt. He is innocent until proven guilty. If, for any reason Courts Officers , acting on behalf of enforcing State and Federal Laws, has acted improperly in procuring physical evidence or testimony, that would prove Nolan's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the States case against him falls apart.
If such evidence is discovered that proves the underlying basis of the Grand Jury's indictment was unwarranted. That evidence was obtained illegally, without due process, or tampered with either before, during or after the indictment the presiding Judge has cause to dismiss the indictment.
As I said before, I don't know the details of this case. But I do know that Officers of the Court can be held to the highest standards of diligence and proof, when anyone is charged with a committing a crime. Innocent until proven guilty places the burden of proof on those making the charge, not the other way around. If and when it is discovered the State is unable to prove its case, without respect to innocence or guilt of the person charged, the only options are dismissal of the case, or proceeding with what will ultimately be declared a mistrial.