MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, April 27th 2024 - 05:08 UTC

 

 

Brazilian court rules Congressman must leave his seat because he was not eligible

Wednesday, May 17th 2023 - 10:40 UTC
Full article 13 comments

Brazil's Superior Electoral Court (TSE) Tuesday ruled that Congressman Deltan Dallagnol needs to leave his post effective immediately because he was not eligible. The decision came months after the lawmaker and former prosecutor took his oath of office and served on the Lower House, Agencia Brasil reported. Read full article

Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Terence Hill

    BRASIL WIRE , FEBRUARY 9, 2021
    ”Lula’s arrest is “a gift from the CIA”, mocked Lava Jato prosecutor
    Moro and Dallagnol have been accused of “treason” for their illegal collusion with United States authorities. In 2017, deputy US attorney general Kenneth Blanco boasted at an Atlantic Council event of informal (illegal) collaboration with Brazilian prosecutors on the Lula case, citing it as a success story. ...
    On April 5, 2018, the day Lula was arrested by Moro, prosecutor Isabel Grobba revealed the news: “Moro orders Lula to be arrested,” head of the Lava Jato task force Dallagnol replied:
    https://www.brasilwire.com/lula-arrest-is-a-gift-from-the-cia-mocked-lava-jato-prosecutor/

    May 17th, 2023 - 11:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pugol-H

    Perhaps he should take refuge in the Ecuadorian Embassy, until the fuss is over.

    ‘qualified legal opinions’, notwithstanding.

    May 17th, 2023 - 11:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    https://en.mercopress.com/2023/05/09/lula-supports-assange-s-cause/comments#comment526002

    “As I said, push the ‘reality check’ button”

    Don`t worry Bub it will get pushed.

    ”Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote: “In short, the First Amendment does not ‘belong’ to any definable category of persons or entities: It belongs to all who exercise its freedoms.”

    I said Lula was innocent and was proved correct, and so is this guy, unless they intend to override their own Constitution.

    May 19th, 2023 - 10:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pugol-H

    Chief Justice Bugger, obviously has his opinion however he is not the last word on the subject, in fact he is not even involved in the process.

    If his opinion is even considered it clearly is not being followed.

    Once again your rhetoric and the reality are at odds, Clever Julian is being prosecuted and very much looks like a guilty verdict, given the basic facts are not in doubt.

    You may view this as ‘overriding their constitution’, but they clearly do not.

    Despite all objections and protestations the extradition continues, while Clever Julian continues to reside in HMP Belmarsh.

    Is the irrefutable reality here.

    May 19th, 2023 - 03:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    “Julian is being prosecuted and very much looks like a guilty verdict”

    A determination made by a Trump DOJ department. Which tells you everything you need to know about “fruit of the poisoned tree.”

    “Chief Justice Warren Burger, is not the last word on the subject”

    Oh yes, he is the precedent setting last, and only one.

    May 19th, 2023 - 04:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pugol-H

    But Clever Julian is still in jail and being extradited, still facing a trillion year sentence, if found guilty, very likely given the basic facts are not in doubt.

    Chief Justice Bugger’s ‘opinion’ notwithstanding.

    Is the irrefutable reality.

    May 20th, 2023 - 12:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    “Chief Justice Warren Burger’s, ‘opinion’ notwithstanding”
    Ah precedent the highest legal card in deck

    CATO SUPREME COURT REVIEW

    “Various justices and commentators have echoed Burger’s concern with how we would define the press if we adopt the press-as-institution interpretation. In Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc., Justice William Brennan, joined in dissent by Justices Thurgood Marshall, Harry Blackmun, and John Paul Stevens, rejected the view that the Free Press Clause is limited to “media” entities because it is “irreconcilable” with First Amendment principles that protect speech, regardless of its origin, and because it would be impossible to define “media” entities. ” 13.
    13. 472 U.S. 749, 782–83 (1985)
    https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/supreme-court-review/2014/9/sentelle.pdf

    The First Amendment: Categories of Speech
    https ://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11072

    May 20th, 2023 - 02:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pugol-H

    Your ‘highest legal card in deck’ would seem to have been ‘Trumped’ by the US Gov laying a Joker.

    ‘Chief Justice Bugger’ and the ‘Various justices and commentators’ views have been completely ignored and the prosecution has gone ahead anyway.

    The only question remaining is what the verdict will be, when it eventually gets to court in the US.

    Given that the facts are not in dispute, he knowingly passed on classified information he should not have had, the outlook for him is grim, to say the least.

    Whether at that stage the ‘free speech’ defence has any effect remains to be seen.

    What is certain is that it has had no effect whatsoever on events thus far.

    May 21st, 2023 - 03:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    “Your ‘highest legal card in deck’ would seem to have been ‘Trumped’”

    A determination made by a Trump DOJ department. Which tells you everything you need to know about “fruit of the poisoned tree.”

    Analysis of the 'Fruit of the Poisonous Tree' Doctrine

    ”The “fruit of the poisonous tree” is a doctrine that is very similar to the exclusionary rule. Under the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine evidence obtained from illegal arrest, search or seizure is not admissible in the court of law. [1] Such evidence is excluded by the courts at the time of trial and the State is prevented from using the same as evidence.

    MEANING OF THE ‘FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE’

    The fruit of the poisonous tree is a legal metaphor that was developed by the Courts of the United States of America. The meaning of this metaphor is that, evidence (fruit) is inadmissible if it has been obtained as a result of illegal search, arrest and coercive interrogation (i.e. the source of the evidence is poisonous). It is so because it is a violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

    May 21st, 2023 - 03:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pugol-H

    If this argument has even been presented, it also has had no effect whatsoever on events thus far.

    We will just have to wait until the trial to see if the ‘free speech/fruit of the poison tree’ defence has any effect there, they have had none so far.

    My money is on a conviction and a trillion year sentence.

    It's a slam dunk.

    May 21st, 2023 - 03:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    “My money is on a conviction”

    I`m glad I`m following the legal precepts, and not emotive ones.

    Edward Fitzgerald QC, the lawyer defending Assange, argued that his client was not to blame because he merely published documents given to him by former intelligence officer Chelsea Manning.

    “The Court wrote:
    Our holding that the exclusionary rule is an essential part of both the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments is not only the logical dictate of prior cases, but it also makes very good sense. There is no war between the Constitution and common sense. Presently, a federal prosecutor may make no use of evidence illegally seized, but a state’s attorney across the street may, although he supposedly is operating under the enforceable prohibitions of the same Amendment. Thus, the State, by admitting evidence unlawfully seized, serves to encourage disobedience to the Federal Constitution which it is bound to uphold. ”

    — Mapp, 367 U.S. at 657.[14]

    Parallel construction

    Parallel construction is a law enforcement process of building a parallel, or separate, evidentiary basis for a criminal investigation in order to conceal how an investigation actually began.

    “In the US, a particular form is evidence laundering, where one police officer obtains evidence via means that are in violation of the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, and then passes it on to another officer, who builds on it and gets it accepted by the court under the good-faith exception as applied to the second officer.[2] This practice gained support after the Supreme Court's 2009 Herring v. United States decision. ”

    May 21st, 2023 - 05:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pugol-H

    ‘I`m glad I`m following the legal precepts, and not emotive ones.’

    Nothing ‘emotive’ about it, I’m just stating the reality that is staring you in the face.

    Again, none of these supposed legal arguments have had any effect on events, so far.

    Meanwhile Clever Julian is still banged up awaiting extradition, which is probably going to happen, eventually.

    I repeat, ‘we will just have to wait until the trial to see if the “free speech/fruit of the poison tree/ exclusionary rule/ Parallel construction” defence has any effect there, they have had none so far.'

    ‘merely published documents’, that were classified and that he should not have had, never mind deliberately and with malice aforethought ‘published’.

    Hardly could there be a more damming admission, no wonder the hearing went against him.

    Admit it, he is Proper F*cked, no prospect of getting out any time soon.

    May 21st, 2023 - 11:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Terence Hill

    “None of these supposed legal arguments have had any effect on events, so far. ”

    That’s because they are not germane to extradition, or the British legal system.

    “Edward Fitzgerald QC, the lawyer defending Assange, argued that his client was not to blame because he merely published documents given to him by former intelligence officer Chelsea Manning.”

    “Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote: “In short, the First Amendment does not ‘belong’ to any definable category of persons or entities: It belongs to all who exercise its freedoms.”

    ”The indictment breaks all legal precedents. No publisher has ever been prosecuted for disclosing national secrets since the founding of the nation more than two centuries ago,“ wrote journalism professor Mark Feldstein in his testimony on behalf of the defense. ”The belated decision to disregard this 230-year-old precedent and charge Assange criminally for espionage was not an evidentiary decision but a political one.“
    https ://www.wired.com/story/julian-assange-us-extradition-case/

    Hence, a determination made by a Trump DOJ department. Which tells you everything you need to know about ”fruit of the poisoned tree.”

    May 22nd, 2023 - 02:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!