I’m an old common law lawyer and need some statutory help here.
I recently wrote here, concerning Peter Strzok, what can happen to a case if an investigator turns up dirty. Dirty cop. The state has to go back and look to see all the other cases and convictions that cop was involved in, and determine whether the conviction of a perp w0ould hold up without the evidence he procured…because all the people he helped put away would surely appeal. Could go back years.
The same would apply to states or federal attorney-prosecutor if he/she were found to be dirty, let’s say, for accepting a bribe.
Ever worse a judge! Imagine all the cases they may have tried that would have to be reviewed.
Well, what if a judge, and the prosecutor and the defense counsel all three teamed up to defraud the People?
That’s right. The People.
You see, in every criminal case, state and federal, the People, are the ones bringing the action, and the prosecutor and the judge are the Peoples’ agents to insure it’s done according to the rules>
Every federal criminal case is styled “The United States versus Joe Schmoo”. Every criminal case in state court would be styled “the People of New York versus Joe Schmoo,”
So, who’s being cheated here? The People.
Only it seems they have no legal representation in court, if all the members of that court have conspired to put one over on the People.
See what I’m getting at here?
Who represents the People when it’s the people who are the victims and their duly sworn and appointed protectors are all in on the fraud?
Last week, in order to gain leverage over Michael Cohen, one of Donald Trump’s private attorneys, with a boatload of real evidence to convict Cohen for a very long time, Cohen’s lawyer, former (?) Clinton lawyer Lanny Davis, teamed up with the federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York, to have Cohen plead to charges for crimes that do not exist;, i.e. acts that are not criminal—in exchange for a guaranteed 5-year sentence.
Why? I’m not sure. Maybe the mandatory minimum on the real charges would be far larger.
Bribery? An in-kind campaign contribution to the Democratic Party? RICO?
All I know is that The People did not have a representative in that court room, and by law, they must.
Surely somewhere out there there is some amicus curiae appeal, on behalf of the People, to plead the People’s case, and then be able to take the case to next higher court.
Where am I wrong here?