Possibly not other trials but that also depends. What I’m getting at is parallel investigations, not trials.
Also, here is something in regards to “after-discovered evidence”:
“After-discovered evidence, or newly discovered evidence, is evidence which existed at the time of the original trial but was only discovered after the conclusion of the trial. After-discovered evidence is an issue predominantly in criminal proceedings and may be used as the basis for a motion for a new trial.”
Additionally, it was made clear that Joffe was working with Durham’s team. Really doesn’t matter what happened in Sussman’s trial.
Pedes are bummed that Sussman walked, yet it seems that Durham let him walk in order to get certain evidence admitted. So, now, does that evidence get to be used in a future court case? Probably not, unless that evidence is connected to the wrong doing within the new case. So if HRC get to sit in the box, will this evidence be introduced to nail her? Can it be used or will it have to sit on a shelf? This entire court case is a puzzle and we as outside observers need to understand that we do not know what the final picture is going to be nor do we know which side of the puzzle pieces are going to be laid down. But once the puzzle comes together there will be no way the Left can say it is wrong because the picture will be total and in full focus.
JFK also had a Jr
Donald Trump too
Michael Flynn too
Where is Huber? He wrapped up his investigation a few years back and passed everything on to Durham.
I thought I read somewhere that it couldn't?
Possibly not other trials but that also depends. What I’m getting at is parallel investigations, not trials.
Also, here is something in regards to “after-discovered evidence”:
“After-discovered evidence, or newly discovered evidence, is evidence which existed at the time of the original trial but was only discovered after the conclusion of the trial. After-discovered evidence is an issue predominantly in criminal proceedings and may be used as the basis for a motion for a new trial.”
Additionally, it was made clear that Joffe was working with Durham’s team. Really doesn’t matter what happened in Sussman’s trial.
What did Joffe admit to and who was he a witness for?
Standing here... I realize
which Durham has Huber docs? hmmmm
#4773
Durham 'true' start?
Durham 'take-over' Huber [select parts re: CF-i]?
What if there's another prosecutor (outside of DC) assigned by SESSIONS w/ the same mandate/authority?
Q
Pedes are bummed that Sussman walked, yet it seems that Durham let him walk in order to get certain evidence admitted. So, now, does that evidence get to be used in a future court case? Probably not, unless that evidence is connected to the wrong doing within the new case. So if HRC get to sit in the box, will this evidence be introduced to nail her? Can it be used or will it have to sit on a shelf? This entire court case is a puzzle and we as outside observers need to understand that we do not know what the final picture is going to be nor do we know which side of the puzzle pieces are going to be laid down. But once the puzzle comes together there will be no way the Left can say it is wrong because the picture will be total and in full focus.