https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/re ... 2f0ac2ca2eJACKSONVILLE, Fla. (AP) — Court documents show former U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown, whose initial conviction in a charity fraud case was tossed out by an appeals court, will plead guilty before a second trial.
U.S. District Judge Timothy Corrigan scheduled a change of plea hearing Wednesday morning for Brown, a once-powerful Florida Democrat who had previously pleaded not guilty to 18 charges including mail and wire fraud.
The second trial had been set to begin in September. Brown’s original 2017 conviction was tossed by an appeals court because Corrigan improperly removed a juror who said the “Holy Spirit” told him she was innocent. Before the fraud case, Brown represented the Jacksonville area in Congress for about 25 years.
Corrine Brown (D) to plead guilty before 2nd trial
Corrine Brown (D) to plead guilty before 2nd trial
Don't stop reading just because it's another Democrat who ranks way up there on the intersectional hierarchy convicted of fraud. You might miss the hilarious part that puts religion in a very negative light.
And when the Confederates saw Jackson standing fearless like a stonewall, the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Re: Corrine Brown (D) to plead guilty before 2nd trial
In other news Ajax goes after another black woman. But he's not a Nazi anymore. Nor is he racist. It is just his thing to constantly whine about black people, especially black women. Even people like this woman who hasn't even been in office in half a decade.
Meanwhile, Republicans have written the book of how to commit fraud, and ajax doesn't care.
Meanwhile, Republicans have written the book of how to commit fraud, and ajax doesn't care.
"I am not an American ... In my view premarital sex should be illegal" - Ajax18
- Doctor CamNC4Me
- God
- Posts: 9050
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am
Re: Corrine Brown (D) to plead guilty before 2nd trial
I HATE THE JEEEEEEEEEEETS!!!!! REEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
Re: Corrine Brown (D) to plead guilty before 2nd trial
So do you think a juror who insists the Holy Spirit revealed to me she was innocent should be considered nonbiased and allowed to sit on the jury?
And when the Confederates saw Jackson standing fearless like a stonewall, the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Re: Corrine Brown (D) to plead guilty before 2nd trial
Res Ipsa do you know anything about how Holy Spirit claims are treated in court?
And when the Confederates saw Jackson standing fearless like a stonewall, the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Re: Corrine Brown (D) to plead guilty before 2nd trial
That’s a new one on me. I’m going to look at the 11th Cir. Opinion.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.
Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.
Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
Re: Corrine Brown (D) to plead guilty before 2nd trial
Sounds like something out of my Gospel Doctrine class. Ajax, would you say it's best to ixnay on the Holy Spirit talk?
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
Re: Corrine Brown (D) to plead guilty before 2nd trial
I was just curious if there were any way for the judge to know ahead of time that you can't reject a juror just because he says, "The Holy Spirit has revealed to me that she is innocent." Is that a standard rule or just something that the appellate court decided after the fact?That’s a new one on me. I’m going to look at the 11th Cir. Opinion.
And when the Confederates saw Jackson standing fearless like a stonewall, the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Re: Corrine Brown (D) to plead guilty before 2nd trial
It’s a really interesting situation and opinion. If the juror has said what he did during jury selection and the judge dismissed the juror for cause, he very likely would have been upheld on appeal. (Actually, an appeal would have been unlikely.)ajax18 wrote: ↑Thu May 19, 2022 1:11 pmI was just curious if there were any way for the judge to know ahead of time that you can't reject a juror just because he says, "The Holy Spirit has revealed to me that she is innocent." Is that a standard rule or just something that the appellate court decided after the fact?That’s a new one on me. I’m going to look at the 11th Cir. Opinion.
The case was unusual because the jury has started deliberating when the remark was made. It was reported to the judge by another juror. Dismissing a juror during deliberations is rare, and has to be based on strong evidence of juror misconduct.
The judge first interviewed the reporting juror, who saiid the remarks had been made at the beginning of deliberations, but also that the juror has been actively participating in the discussions about evidence and following the judge’s instructions.
Then the judge interviewed the juror who made the remark. He confirmed what he said and also said that he was examining the evidence and was willing to follow the law as described in the jury instructions.
The majority opinion says that, in light of the fact that there was no evidence that the juror was not following the jury instructions, the remark about the Holy Ghost was not sufficient to meet the high standards required to remove a juror during deliberations.
I think one of the concurring opinions got it right: The judge never should have interviewed the jurors in the first place. The note did not say the juror was refusing to participate in the deliberations or violating the jury instructions. The judge should have let the jury continue to deliberate.
I agree because, once the case goes to the jury, the jury should be allowed to do its thing. It’s not uncommon for a juror to be convinced of guilty or innocence at the start of deliberations (whether based on their gut or inspiration) but then change their minds during deliberations. The process of reviewing all the evidence and apply the law as stated in the instructions is a meaningful process that can change peoples minds. I served on a jury and watched it happen.
The result on appeal would have been different if the juror has said he didn’t need to look at and discuss the evidence and just sat in the corner playing angry birds on his phone. That would be misconduct.
I think the dissenting opinion makes good arguments as well. It was a very close case, with lots of good arguments made in all of the opinions. The trial judge was faced with a hard problem that had no obvious right answer. The fact that he was overruled doesn’t mean he did a bad job.
Interesting stuff. Thanks for prompting me to read the decision.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.
Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.
Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
Re: Corrine Brown (D) to plead guilty before 2nd trial
Ajax, what’s your understanding of “intersectional” and why do you claim its part of a hierarchy?
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.
Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.
Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.