Originally Posted by ftbt
Earlier in the case, however, Sullivan wrote of similar amicus brief requests: "The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure do not provide for intervention by third parties in criminal cases ... Options exist for a private citizen to express his views about matters of public interest, but the Court's docket is not an available option," adding "the docket is the record of official proceedings related to criminal charges brought by the United States against an individual who has pled guilty to a criminal offense" and "for the benefit of the parties in this case and the public, the docket must be maintained in an orderly fashion and in accordance with court rules."

Sidney Powell, filed a six-page motion Tuesday evening slamming the decision, writing: "This Court has consistently — on 24 previous occasions — summarily refused to permit any third party to inject themselves or their views into this case," adding "the proposed amicus brief has no place in this court."

[Linked Image from zerohedge.com]

SAY WHAT ??





Even in civil cases, at the district court level, amicus briefs are not generally accepted. Last year I had a federal district court in Arizona refuse to accept an amicus brief I filed even though it was directly on point and provided the court with important background information on the question in the case. So yes, amicus briefs are not only not typically accepted in criminal cases, they are almost always rejected in civil cases at this level.

What Judge Sullivan is doing is not supported by the rules of procedure and not supported by logic, since an amicus brief is supposed to provide the court with new and relevant information, something that can't exist in a case that the DOJ is trying to drop. This is a clear attempt to create a public distraction that the media will glom onto to create echos of Hussein Obama's talking points about the rule of law and precedent.

So if this Judge intends to create a trial by media, I'm talking to some other lawyers right now about flooding the court with pro-Flynn amicus briefs. The only way this Judge is going to back down is if he sees that he'll have so many briefs supporting Flynn that he has to shut down all amicus briefs or be shown to be discriminating against parties. If nothing else, we will at least get a counterpoint on the record. My plan is to draft an amicus brief that attacks the politicization of the court and repeats the truth about how this entire case was a fraud on the court meant to destroy a man's life. I am trying to get at least a dozen other lawyers to submit their own briefs along the same lines.

Eliminate qualified immunity and you'll eliminate cops who act like they are above the law.