• chiliedogg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    18 hours ago

    That’s probably accurate that there wasn’t a true bill, but it’s one of those things that I don’t think has actually been tested.

    The specific circumstances where the foreman signed off on the second indictment with 2 charges instead of 3 without the rest of the grand jury suing the exact bill is really weird. But if it weren’t for the statue of limitations it would be an easy remedy - just take it back to the grand jury.

    And if it were a different technical error, there’s a 6- month period after the SoL in which an indictment that’s thrown out of techical grounds can be corrected.

    But the combination of the 2 is unprecedented as far as I know, and there’s a legitimate legal question as to whether it’s a bad indictment that should be thrown on on technical grounds (giving 6 months to re-file) or if it simply wasn’t an indictment at all.

    And now with the whole thing being thrown out because Halligan isn’t actually a US Attorney, it’s even more confusing - especially when it comes to prosecutorial misconduct she may not have committed since she wasn’t actually a prosecutor.

    It’s a fascinating train-wreck.

    • fodor@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      I am still confused why the judge didn’t clarify the matter. They said to roll back the situation to before the effort was made, but if we take that literally, then basic math says Comey is safe now, and if he is, then his dismissal was effectively with prejudice.