User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: DOJ owes millions to FL family

  1. #1
    Points: 1,066, Level: 7
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 184
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    baileeshilltop's Avatar Junior Member
    Karma
    10
    Join Date
    Aug 2022
    Posts
    6
    Points
    1,066
    Level
    7
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Angry DOJ owes millions to FL family

    Here is one of a bunch of cases where a fed attorney, who was not authorized to be a prosecutor but worked on a prosecution caused the case to be vacated. How the hell can the DOJ say they do not have certifications of authority for their prosecutors. Look at just one of them here: US v Forman (1995); Although the attorney in question was a federal attorney assigned to the SEC, because they were not specifically authorized to act as an AUSA, the case had to be vacated.

  2. #2
    Points: 1,057, Level: 7
    Level completed: 36%, Points required for next Level: 193
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    ortrivera's Avatar Junior Member
    Karma
    10
    Join Date
    Aug 2022
    Posts
    9
    Points
    1,057
    Level
    7
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    WOAH i read this
    heard POGO is trying to get this out publicly

  3. #3
    Points: 1,066, Level: 7
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 184
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    baileeshilltop's Avatar Junior Member
    Karma
    10
    Join Date
    Aug 2022
    Posts
    6
    Points
    1,066
    Level
    7
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The attorney is Rick Diaz in south Florida
    He’s some National expert

  4. #4
    Points: 1,057, Level: 7
    Level completed: 36%, Points required for next Level: 193
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    ortrivera's Avatar Junior Member
    Karma
    10
    Join Date
    Aug 2022
    Posts
    9
    Points
    1,057
    Level
    7
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I read the DOJ said they didn’t want to stop this because they thought it would start a pile of lawsuits.

  5. #5
    Points: 1,066, Level: 7
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 184
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    baileeshilltop's Avatar Junior Member
    Karma
    10
    Join Date
    Aug 2022
    Posts
    6
    Points
    1,066
    Level
    7
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Can you explain this to me in more detail? I know vague rumblings

  6. #6
    Points: 1,057, Level: 7
    Level completed: 36%, Points required for next Level: 193
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    ortrivera's Avatar Junior Member
    Karma
    10
    Join Date
    Aug 2022
    Posts
    9
    Points
    1,057
    Level
    7
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The Executive Office of the US Attorney said even if the prosecutors don’t have a certification of authority, so what. Yet here is a case where the Executive Offices used the certification to win a case, they lost at first. So I guess the certification of authority is only important when the DOJ need to win. Not because it is the law. US V. Navarro, 1999, Navarro (Plaintiff) won his case but lost upon appeal. The government was able to provide the court with the certification of authority for the AUSA in question demonstrating the authority was still in effect at the time of the prosecution.

  7. #7
    Points: 1,066, Level: 7
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 184
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    baileeshilltop's Avatar Junior Member
    Karma
    10
    Join Date
    Aug 2022
    Posts
    6
    Points
    1,066
    Level
    7
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    How do you find out if this is happening???

  8. #8
    Points: 1,057, Level: 7
    Level completed: 36%, Points required for next Level: 193
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    ortrivera's Avatar Junior Member
    Karma
    10
    Join Date
    Aug 2022
    Posts
    9
    Points
    1,057
    Level
    7
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You can do a Freedom of Information, FOIA, search and get the docs for any of these federal prosecutors. For anybody just curious, prosecuted by the federal government or who plead guilty, a simple Freedom of Information Request (FOIA) can be made directly to the US Dept of Justice at: Usaeo.foia.requests@usdoj.gov. The request should specify: the name (s) of the prosecutors, what office they are/were located in, a request for the Oath of Appointment, Certification of Authority and the dates recorded.

  9. #9
    Points: 1,066, Level: 7
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 184
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    baileeshilltop's Avatar Junior Member
    Karma
    10
    Join Date
    Aug 2022
    Posts
    6
    Points
    1,066
    Level
    7
    Thanks Given
    0
    Thanked 0x in 0 Posts
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Oh awesome ok, thanks dude
    Tell me about the case?

  10. #10

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 473,135, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 69.0%
    Achievements:
    Social50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassYour first GroupVeteranRecommendation First ClassOverdrive
    Awards:
    Master Tagger
    DGUtley's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    200769
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Northeast Ohio
    Posts
    52,922
    Points
    473,135
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    17,060
    Thanked 46,039x in 24,874 Posts
    Mentioned
    886 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Before I move it, how is a 1995 case "latest news"?

    Here's the holding on the case:

    The defendant, Theodore Forman, appeals from his conviction and sentence following a jury verdict finding him guilty of criminal contempt in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 401(3). The conviction is based on Forman's alleged violation of the grand jury secrecy requirement imposed by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e)(2). Before this court, appearing pro se, Forman raises numerous issues, but we shall address only the question whether Forman is subject to the secrecy requirement of Rule 6(e)(2); more specifically, whether he was an "attorney for the government" as that term is used in the rule.

    We conclude that Forman was not "an attorney for the government," and so was not subject to the secrecy requirement of Rule 6(e)(2). Consequently, his conviction for criminal contempt must be reversed.


    https://www.courtlistener.com/opinio...urt_nmctapp=on
    Any time you give a man something he doesn't earn, you cheapen him. Our kids earn what they get, and that includes respect. -- Woody Hayes​

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DGUtley For This Useful Post:

    RMNIXON (08-08-2022),stjames1_53 (08-08-2022)

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts