From the Winnipeg Free Press:
KNOXVILLE, Tenn. - The attorney charged with hacking Sarah Palin's email says the defendant will not testify in his federal trial in Knoxville.
Prosecutors say college student David Kernell was trying to derail Palin's campaign when he accessed her personal email account while she was the Republican candidate for vice-president in 2008.
Kernell's attorney, Wade Davies, said Monday morning that Kernell won't testify and that the defence has rested its case after only putting one witness on the stand Friday, an FBI agent who said Kernell had been emotionally upset.
This is bullshit! I have personally talked to Wade Davies assistant and told her what I know, Mercede has called and left messages repeatedly, and my fellow bloggers have written blog posts which have been sent to the defense (Not to mention what all of you have undoubtedly sent their direction).
I was told that Wade Davies is a very competent attorney and that he had a plan. But THIS simply cannot be it!
Where is the Palin cross examination? Where is the introduction of evidence which shows that she lied on the stand? What about when she REALLY hacked Randy Reudrich's computer with the help of an IT specialist? Or what about when the Johnston's computers were REALLY hacked and their personal information stripped out of their hard drives when Palin was chosen as the VP candidate?
I received a lot of flak from some of you demanding that I tell the defense the information that would help David Kernell. Well I want all of you to know that I did! I not only sent what I knew, and linked to posts of mine and others, but I gave their contact information to Mercede and she called as well. Nobody called her or I back. Nobody!
Now I know that Palin was not on trial here, but her testimony was vital to the prosecutions case, and she lied. That must be significant, right? I am not a lawyer, so if any of you are legal eagles perhaps you can tell me what I am missing here.
But if David Kernell ends up serving time in prison that is all on the shoulders of his defense team. I can tell you right now that the Alaska bloggers, and even the Johnston family, did everything they could to help save him from that fate.
It is really disconcerting and intriguing that the defense closed. What is up? I hope that young man gets a just, fair sentence, which would be a light sentence. Hmmm.
ReplyDeleteIt was pretty obvious in his lame attempt at cross examining Palin that he is worthless. This kid didn't have a chance. He must have gotten a good pay off for throwing the case in their favor.
ReplyDeleteAnd, thank you Gryph and Mercede, et al for the big effort to inform this case. Don't feel bad that it apparently wasn't part of the trial. Your deeds were very kind to Mr. Kernell and very patriotic.
ReplyDeleteSo, it makes me wonder... what is Palin doing behind the scenes? Has she paid somebody off? You're right, it makes NO sense. I am so ready for her lying ways to start catching up with her... I'm full up and spilling over with frustration. It will all come to light, right????
ReplyDeleteI knew this defense attorney was not going to get the job done. The Palin juggernaut is too powerful. For now.
ReplyDeleteI feel sorry for this Kernell. Palin is ruthless in the pursuit of revenge. I fear it will be a long while before justice is served.
The defense rests ......... because there is no defense.
ReplyDelete'He did it, so what?'
http://citypaper.net/print-article.php?aid=21893
ReplyDeleteGryphen....if you read the linked article, you'll cheer up. It was in The Philadelphia City Paper last week, and it gave me hope that the higher Sarah goes, the farther she'll fall.
well gryphen maybe they know the people on the jury are ignorant hicks like palin, and there's nothing that the kid can say that will sway their opinion. maybe it's just not worth the time, effort, and money.
ReplyDeleteSo on Thursday and Friday, it was all about Bristol Palin got nasty emails and phone calls and Big Momma couldn't communicate with her children. Today, the case is about the McCain campaign.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I don't necessarily think that any of our blog chatter and speculation is profoundly important to this case, but I do think that journalists should accurately report what's going on in a Knoxville courtroom.
Can he appeal on grounds of incompetent counsel?
ReplyDeleteA couple of weeks ago, I was in a jury selection process, that went on and on, my name wasn't drawn, but the defense and prosecution were thorough in their selection, asking leading questions, and removing so many of the potential jurors. Perhaps Kernell's attorney is playing a card we just don't know about. Perhaps during the selection, information was brought up to the jurors, so that they could actually see what backstabbers the Palins were and their testimony irrevelant to the case. Perhaps using the information sent by bloggers would have jeapordized their goal. I can see why Kernell won't be taking the stand - nor was the defendent in the case that I was almost on - the prosecuting attorney would cross-examine Kernell in such a way that would make him self-incriminate. If, found guilty, the judge may have a lenient sentence. If not, then an appeal to a higher court may be in the works. (all wishful thinking on my part, but hey, let's be optimistic for now)
ReplyDeleteI'm willing to give the defense the benefit of the doubt. We are not in the courtroom. We don't know exactly what the jury heard. And, most importantly, most of us are not attorneys.
ReplyDeleteThe defense may be going for acquittal and believes giving Palin more time on the stand (especially when her testimony largely has to do with the supposed effect of what allegedly happened, not the crime this young man is accused of) can only hurt Kernell. She's known for her charm and is slippery as an eel.
If Kernell is found guilty on any of the charges, further examination of the Palins' testimony may be warranted during the sentencing phase.
Can we hope that the closing arguments are where the defense attorney will lay down the argument to get Kernell a fair, light judgment?
ReplyDeleteThe attorney charged with hacking Sarah Palin's email?
ReplyDeleteI agree. What was the defense going to say? He's guilty. The idiot should have taken a plea aggreement.
ReplyDeleteAlso you can bring Palin into the equation all you want, but nothing she's done in the past would be amissable. This is about the FELONY Mr. Kernell committed.
WTF, indeed.
ReplyDeleteThere was no defense at all. If there was any, I didn't see it. Hopefully, Kernell will appeal, but not with this yahoo lawyer.
Once again, Palin is made of teflon, and this star-struck jury will probably convict. The judge will probably make him serve time since The Grifter was a "sitting governor" at the time.
While those little Republican assholes who attempted to tap Mary Landreiu's (a sitting senator) phones got a slap on the wrist.
American Justice, my ass.
>He must have gotten a good pay off for throwing the case in their favor.
ReplyDeleteWhy, oh why do you suspect the college kid?
Anything Mrs Paylin has done is not going to be helpful here.The kid admitted he did it.The trial was more to decide sentencing,mostly to determine his motive.We might want the attorney to bring up all of the Paylin lies,etc,but that would have been no help for the defense.Not putting him on the stand is pretty much SOP,if they do,the prosecution can open a lot more doors in questioning.
ReplyDeleteThis case is being used as a test case to determine penalty involved in internet wrongdoing,in my opinion. But it has only ever been about the sentence,not whether or not he is guilty. Keeping him off the stand keeps the jury from getting to form an opinion about him other than the sort of sad,repentant one that he has projected so far.
Until someone actually stands up to her, she is untouchable. YES UNTOUCHABLE!!!
ReplyDeleteYou have people who won't go on record.
People who SAY they know interesting stuff.
People who THINK they know.
People who are HOLDING INFORMATION and waiting for the right time.
Let me ask you.
WHEN IS THE RIGHT TIME?
Is it after she is elected President when she can take us into WW3?
Is it when she has increased her income into the HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS?
WHEN IS THE RIGHT TIME?
Is there really a collaborative effort to take this woman down?
I don't think so. You have bloggers and bloggers all on a different tangent. There is nothing cohesive about this. If everyone can gather around on central method than we might have a chance until then, nothing is going to happen.
MSM is not going to take a single blog that seriously. Sure maybe the Huffington Post will post an article or two. But the MSM will not take it seriously enough.
We need facts and we need them fast.
If anyone is serious about this, this is surely a sign that action needs to be taken.
Whether this person was paid off or not, something is NOT RIGHT with this defense. Is everyone scared of Palin?
Think about this...
THIS WOMAN PULLED OFF THE BIGGEST HOAX IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATS!!!
She faked her pregnancy.
And yes, SHE GOT AWAY WITH IT!
Are we all going to sit down and just take it.
Face it, everyone looks at us as bunch of loons, just like Teabaggers. It's true. No one wants to stand up and publicly state... PALIN FAKED IT!
We can't sit down and take this anymore.
Seriously.
What are we going to do?
I don't think the prosecution has much of a case. Identity theft requires that the thief USE the info to defraud, he didn't. He did not unlawfully access a computer because Yahoo mail is cloud computing, web-based. Wire fraud?? How? Impeding an FBI investigation?
ReplyDeleteWhat is left?
To say I am disappointed is a profound understatement.
ReplyDeleteUnless the defense attorney bought into the idea that cross-examining Bristol and Sarah would create a sympathy backlash, I cannot see why he did not try harder. I cannot see this kid get acquitted.
A plea bargain might have been better, if one was offered - of course, that depends upon the terms offered, if any were.
It just really sickens me that once again, Sarah Palin seems to trip the light fantastic over the justice system.
This so reminds me of how George W. Bush slipped out of his AWOL charges. How evidence was destroyed and no real investigation was done even though there were witnesses to the fact and to his absence. Rich boy, strings pulled. Rich girl, celebrity wand is waved . . . .
Hopefully, the spell will be broken sooner than later. History shows that the spell these creeps weave always ends. It is just the misery that they cause until then that makes me furious.
So every time the Palins go to court, they are represented by Clarence Darrow and the opposition is incompetent idiots.
ReplyDeleteGot it!
I wonder how "derailed" that campaign could've been?
ReplyDelete9/24/2008
After McCain announced suspending his campaign, "...Steve Schmidt suggested Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee, would also suspend her campaign.
“We're going to take the ads down. They won't be traveling. There won’t be rallies,” Schmidt said when asked about Palin’s campaign, according to a rough transcription provided to reporters.
Schmitt pointed out that Palin’s schedule has only been released through Friday and said that she has no public events planned after she attends a Thursday morning speech McCain is slated to deliver here to the Clinton Global Initiative.
McCain’s announcement puts Palin in a tricky spot.
...
Even before McCain’s announcement, Palin’s campaign schedule was far from rigorous.
Since Palin was selected as McCain’s running mate in late August, she’s appeared at 21 rallies, most of which were at McCain’s side, has yet to hold a press conference, has conducted less than a handful of national media interviews and has pulled out of several fundraising appearances.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13883.html
I agree with you completely, Anonymous 8:45. I have been writing articles about this subject for more than a year. We need to rally the troops and bring this witch down once and for all! The main difference between you and me is that I am not an anonymous blogger. We need more to do the same.
ReplyDeletehttp://floydmorr.blogspot.com/
Argh!
ReplyDeleteI agree with those who say that we should give the defense attorney the benefit of the doubt. We just have to hope that justice will be served. Anything more than time served is a travesty. Palin's decision to put state documents on a nonsecure server is the worse crime. The garbage testimony by Bristol and Palin is just that: garbage. More of the same Palin-as-eternal-victim.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that Palin's lies and past misdeeds are irrelevant in this case. The boy is on trial, not Palin. Insofar as Palin tried to paint herself as the victim, well, she didn't convince any NEW people. Those who have been blind to her, remain so. The rest of us aren't impressed.
But do know that Palin will answer for her deeds at some point: we all do. She may be robbing her loyal dupes blind, but her poll numbers are falling and Palin articles just aren't as ubiquitous as they used to be. I can go to Huffpo several times a week without seeing her face unless I scroll to the very bottom. That's a nice change.
I'm a lawyer. I don't know Wade Davies but he's listed in Best Lawyers in America (which you can't buy your way onto--this isn't to say that I agree with all their picks but it's certainly a big deal), SuperLawyers (which is the top 5% of the lawyers in a practice area), and has very good credentials. He also has alot of trial experience.
ReplyDeleteI can also say with absolute certainty that defense lawyers are not "bought off" to throw cases--they do far better reporting that sort of thing than they ever would from taking money. It simply doesn't happen. Am I saying it never has? No--of course not. But it really is the grounds for losing your license and being subject to a whopping malpractice suit and, with all due respect, I don't believe the Palins or anyone associated with them would shell out the mega millions of dollars it would take for that risk to even be tempting.
There's no way to know what the basis for the decision was.
This attorney's job was to defend his client, not bring down Palin. In terms of defending his client, Palin is a distraction. My guess is he will use his summation time to show the jury that the prosecution didn't prove its case. Certainly there was no money stolen, so there can't have been identity theft or wire fraud. It is not a crime to possess someone else's personal information. He never even sent an email pretending to be Palin.
ReplyDeleteLook, we know your sources are very good, and we trust what you tell us is accurate, and it seems like you did your best, but they just didn't believe you, Gryph.
ReplyDeleteI have a feeling a deal was struck as so not to drag the Paylin crap out or the info is incomplete, just saying. . . . . .
ReplyDeleteThis young man will be punished if he broke the law.
ReplyDeleteBut consider another possibility -
Think back to September 2008. The McCain campaign, James Dobson and his Colorado Springs NeoCon organizations had already involved themselves in Alaska state business. Alaska legislators were dragged into court. Lots of stuff was happening.
Mrs. Palin was already under scrutiny with public records requests of emails and she and her list of family, friends, staff, etc. were on notice from the State of Alaska that intermingling private and state business in private email accounts, and including her husband who was not a state employee in privileged business communication, was not acceptable.
Just before this incident happened, she had been counseled with Attorney General opinion. She was being advised daily by a pack of professional McCain campaign staffers. They all knew what was going on with her.
Her story of being informed of the breach is interesting itself. She and Todd were in a hotel room, they saw photos of kids on T.V. At that very moment, Secret Service and McCain staff came to her room to tell her the bad news. Hmm.
The very first thing that happened was an auto-generated message to her Yahoo inbox. Those of you with BlackBerrys will know that you get a signal and icon when you have an email message. Those of you with email accounts will know that it likely would've been followed by a bunch more, that her password had changed and other informative junk that gets auto-generated by our service. So logically, she would have had a pile of messages from Yahoo in her inbox as well as multiple new message signals and icons on her BlackBerry(s).
By her own testimony, this was her critical communication with her children and their caregivers. According to her personal attorney (and exactly why was he supeonaed anyway?) this was her necessary staff communication. One would reasonably assume that each of those message notices would've gotten attention. But she didn't know?
Based on all of this, the fact that Todd changed his email address the day before, the apparent absence of any significant genuine communication being discovered and posted by Kernell, and her lack of awareness of the breach, the only possibility is that this Yahoo account that the "Rubicon" schmuck was so excited to have accessed, wasn't actually Mrs. Palin's primary active account.
From the timing of the state of Alaska scrutiny, I speculate that she had already created new accounts, and things were being tidied up by her executive staff and McCain staff. I doubt that it was linked to the BlackBerrys.
Everything was deleted and the Yahoo account inactive just a few hours later.
I think this poor guy if facing 50 years in jail for accessing an inactive account.
~~~
Aside from this, my primary concern is that if this was the only means of communication with her children and the State of Alaska, and if Kernell's action "derailed" the McCain campaign, then it would have first and foremost affected operations of the State of Alaska.
It is time to consider recall action. Actions of a previous governor continue to negatively impact Alaska.
Mrs. Palin has the option to go about her personal business and the pursuit of fame and fortune independently. If she continues to use Alaska and its citizens as her personal platform, we have no choice but to respond with appropriate action.
Take heart everyone. As Martin Luther King paraphrased Thomas Parker, " How long will it take? Not long because the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice." or in other words "karma, ain't it a bitch". Keep working, keep communicating. How long? Not long.
ReplyDeleteI don't even know what to think or say. I guess we will have to wait for the verdict. I had emailed a reporter from the Knoxville Sentinel, Jamie Satterfield, who wrote two articles on the trial. I just went to the newspaper online and the article about the defense resting its case has a byline of :Knoxville Sentinel staff, then at the bottom instead of contact information for the paper (which was there for Ms. Satterfield on her articles) it stated instead: contributed to by the AP.
ReplyDeleteHey - FYI - it's very common for the defense attorney not to put their client on the stand. It opens the client up to all kinds of lines of questioning that are not helpful to the case. Maybe the lawyer's no good, but I would not draw conclusions about it just because he didn't have Kernell testify.
ReplyDeleteI agree wtih the lawyer above. If he's listed in Best Lawyers in America, he has an excellent, and probably well-deserved reputation. It would be fatal among his friends who do defense work to blow this for Palin. And people who are that good at what they do don't generally throw away their reputation for money (and he's right, it would take A LOT of money to make it worth it).
ReplyDeleteFurther, the defendant's father is a local politician. He knows who is good, and while I don't think the attorney is scared of the politician, he would undoubtedly be scared to blow his son's case - which I doubt is happening.
I'm still wait and see, and still assuming the defense attorney knows what he is doing.
REsponding to a comment from above on "and she didn't know?" That is a good point. And I think it illustrates that Palin and Bristol, et al. are lying about so much in this ... just totally lying. There is an email in the Crivella West database from August 19th, 2008 wherein Sarah is asking Janice Mason in her office to find out who and why somebody was allowed access to the computers in the governor's mansion in Juneau for the purpose of retrieving emails. The event supposedly took place on August 4th. So why was Palin just finding out? Well, we know one reason. They hardly saw her in Juneau. Hence the "Where's Sarah" buttons people were wearing; she was collected her per diem whilst sitting at home in Wasilla or obstensibly going to the Anchorage Office (which I think Todd did more than she). Bottom line, she didn't know her computers there had been tampered with; that someone had been in the bedroom there?
ReplyDeleteOnce again it appears that the Chosen One, Sister Sarah Payme skates away unscathed. She and her clan truly live in a Teflon Bubble.
ReplyDeleteI share the frustration here too. It reminds me of Psalm 73 when I feel like there's no justice. It puts the spiritual side into perspective. Hope you guys don't mind:
ReplyDeleteFor I envied the arrogant when I saw the prosperity of the wicked.
They have no struggles, their bodies are healthy and strong. From their callous hearts comes iniquity. The evil conceits of their minds know no limits. They scoff and speak with malice and their ongues take possession of the earth....."
And it continues on, until....."when my heart was grieved and my spirit embittered, yet I am always with you, you hold me by my right hand."
Guess it reminds us that even though it looks like evil people are getting away with it, they eventually get found out. Hope for David Kernell's sake, he gets a fair trial.
If Sarah Palin does indeed believe in prayer, she should know that many a christian right now are pulling together for young David in prayer for a just fair deal. Team Sarah need to know that God is not just on Sarah's side.
It would have been nice if all this info had come out during the course of the trial, but I'm pretty sure any attempt to introduce a lot of the Palin scandal would have been met with vigorous opposition by the prosecution on relevance grounds. None of Palin's lies have any relevance to whether or not Kernell "hacked" her account. The defense attorney probably feels that the prosecution didn't present enough evidence to convict his client of these particular charges, and I'm sure he'll point that out during his closing argument. Each of these crimes has certain specific elements that must be proved. If the prosecution didn't sufficiently prove the elements, then there is reasonable doubt and the defendant must be acquitted. The jury will be specifically instructed that the defendant is presumed innocent and that they are not to hold it against him that he didn't testify. All of the burden of proof is on the prosecution.
ReplyDeleteOf course, I'm speaking of ideals here, so whether or not it will work out this way remains to be seen.
We may have to wait a while for Sarah's downfall, but I do believe it's coming. I have to believe that Americans are better and smarter than this, that as a whole they can reason and ultimately determine what's true and false.
In some respects, all the exposure she gets is a good thing because people can clearly see how self-serving and vacuous she truly is. She's shiny and dazzling on the surface, but there's corruption at the core.
Blue_in_AK
I agree with Donna, he is highly respected in the field. He knows what he is doing. (And not having his client take the stand is a very good decision.)
ReplyDeletePalin is a sideshow as far as the trial of his client goes.
Cross examination is very tricky, and potentially very dangerous. Every question asked can potentially get you an answer you DO NOT want to hear, plus it can open the door for the other lawyer to ask questions in reply to clarify the testimony. Clarification may not be in your client's interests. You do not ask a question you don't know the answer to already, and have the evidence to back up.
Bottom line, Mr. Davis' responsibility is to his client, not to forward whatever agendas we all may have concerning taking down the most vile woman in America.
Tough shit.
Maybe the defense feels strongly enough that the jury won't be able to reach a verdict and a mistrial will be declared (or a verdict of not guilty will be returned). I believe that it needs to be unanimous for a criminal case like this.
ReplyDeleteIf the prosecution feels that it would be a waste of time and resources to pursue another trial they may end up dropping it.
Palin is guilty of every evil covered on this site
ReplyDelete& others, plus many more misdeeds that have slipped under the radar. My theory as to why this trial
came to a halt: Might Mr. Davies have been warned not to recall Palin back to the stand to avoid the possibility of him delving into areas which could prove 'awkward' for her & 'others.' If a threat came from high enough up, it's doubtful any money was
exchanged. An attorney of Mr. Davies' stature would'nt risk his career for a bribe. There's more to it. I just fear for David Kernell, though.
Sharon TN
OK--I went to the federal court website and read the motions and briefs that Wade Davies has filed. They are uniformly excellent--as good as I've seen. He has raised and preserved terrific issues and that may be a significant part of his focus.
ReplyDeleteAs for Sharon at 11:37, with all due respect: if there were any shred of a "warning" or anything of the sort, that would have been grounds for a mistrial and/or prosecution. Read about Dick Scruggs--far more powerful in his area than you can imagine and now in prison for having tried to influence a judge. You'd have the same result here.
There's no way to know why Mr. Davies made the decisions he has made. But he is a very good lawyer and is providing zealous representation to his client. I think it's exceedingly unlikely that any bribe, threat, or anything of the sort is at play here.
This may be a totally brilliant strategy. Why? First, if there was a pre-trial plea bargain Kernell would not only do hard time, he couldn't appeal. Second, Sarah, probably insisted on testifying, so she could feed the EGO. Watching her being interviewed outside the courtroom, she was absolutely giddy - very bizarre.
ReplyDeleteSo what happened during the trial? 1. Sarah perjured herself. 2. Sarah, made a public spectacle of herself "during" the trial, but "outside" the courthouse proceedings. Jurors are supposed to not read any news or tv about the trial during the trial. Sarah probably said many things exclusively outside the courtroom that the jurors will use in making their decision.
Result: Kernell gets convicted, but atttorney is able to keep him out of the slammer until his final appeals are held (not a risk to commit further crimes. An appeal is filed, and the conviction is overturned for Sarah's perjury and improper behavior outside the courtroom. Kernell gets off scott free - a retrial is impossible due to Sarah's actions.
Secondary result: Sarah goes down never to come back up.
Arguing either of these during the trial would not work and would at best get Kernell a re-trial.
Have a look at this 'old' story .... anything ever happen in AK about this? Seems to me that it would have been of interest to somebody!
ReplyDeletehttp://information-security-resources.com/2008/11/22/but-wait-the-palin-story-gets-worse/
Excerpt: " Once the Governor began transmitting information in an unprotected manner via her personal web-based email account, which was outside the State of Alaska’s highly secure and well protected network, there was no way to guarantee the safety and integrity of those date floating in cyber-space. In other words, there was no way for the Governor or other state employees to know if the information which was being transmitted was being intercepted and read by someone who was not authorized under the State’s Data Security Policies and Procedures or the Federal Data Privacy Laws.
Had the hackers only gained access to the Governor’s personal email, only the hackers would be under investigation. BUT, because the Governor also exchanged confidential state information (which contained information about other people) she failed to follow the data privacy regulations, which placed the confidentiality of protected data at risk of being intercepted by unauthorized individuals. Which is exactly what happened."
As I have been saying .....Sarah Palin doesn't have the judgement to safeguard her email account, she can't be trusted with matters of National Security
www.archivist.leapserve.com
Maybe the defense 'rested' because a late deal was worked out after testimony last week ....
ReplyDeleteMaybe the prospect of cross-examining Sarah and Bristol spooked the prosecution/palins .... and over the weekend, a deal was reached?
I don't understand why Alaska doesn't seem to have called Sarah to task over doing govt business over unsecured servers .... In fact, I don't understans A LOT about Alaska, it seems!
I don't get the 'circling the wagons' around the Palins in Wasilla, for one thing. I used to think these small towns were 'cute' .... but now I think they are 'toxic'.
hey ... when is Geoffrey Dunn's book due for release? I thought it was in April!
ReplyDeleteIs he 'adding' a chapter, or something???? Hope so! (in my fantasy, Gryphen and Geoffrey have teamed up for a big scoop!)
Enquiring minds wanna know!
so many lies....Does anyone get text messages while on a plane? If yes, then everyone on that plane had a phone or blackberry and anyone would have helped her contact her family.
ReplyDeleteJust like Bristol was literally surrounded by secret service and campaign people when she was all alone in the middle of woods, next to Walmart and the Best Western.
Kudos for trying to help Kernell, Gryphen! The info you provided will come in handy if there's an appeal and the defense may have already used some of it.
ReplyDeleteThe press coverage of the trial has been pathetically lacking per usual with coverage of anything Palin-related. They did report defense cross-examination emphasizing Palin's lame password and that Bristol indeed had Secret Service protection. It's likely we're really in the dark about what went on the courtroom.
Now we wait and hope the defense wasn't as lame as the impression given by the news reports.
Now is the time to publish those email showing palin used that account and other personal acct. to conduct public business.
ReplyDeleteSorry Gryph, but I'm a lawyer and you just don't get it from a legal perspective. Putting Palin on trial and showing she is a liar isn't going to help the defendant - it's a collateral sideshow and the defendant's lawyer, as a competent professional, knows it is a ticket to nowhere.
ReplyDeleteFrom a legal perspective, it is either a crime to guess someone's password and view their emails or it's not. It's either a crime or it isn't. It doesn't matter if the person whose emails were viewed is a good or bad person (and I personally believe Palin is an evil witch) or whether or not the persons whose emails were viewed suffered any harm as a result of the viewing. It's also irrelevant that Palin was using a Yahoo account for government business. That may make her stupid beyond belief and perhaps there is something unlawful under Alaska law about that, but it's completely irrelevant to whether a crime has been committed by the defendant in the case before the court.
I think you are barking up the wrong tree and not doing yourself or your readers any favors by focusing on the wrong things. Surely you must know some competent lawyers who can explain things like this to you.
Here we go:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.wbir.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=119985&provider=gnews
Prosecutors and defense attorneys are working through the wording of the jury charge with Judge Thomas Phillips.
- snip -
The judge expects to send the jury home after closing arguments. They'll get instructions on Tuesday morning, then start deliberations.
Okay, it sounds to me like the lawyers and judge had a huddle. So what charge(s) do you think they decided upon(er think they proved)?
I believe the charges were identity theft, wire fraud, obstructing an FBI investigation--and I'm drawing a blank on the last one. But I believe there are four charges. Mr. Davies already moved to dismiss all of them so what they're haggling over will be the instructions for the different charges.
ReplyDeleteThe defense asked that the jury be instructed that they can find the defendant guilty of lesser, misdemeanor charges. The judge refused on all but one.
ReplyDeleteIf the jury convicts, it will be on felonies.
The Palins did lie or exagerate, but ... it's not perjury because it wasn't about a material fact. (that is my understanding of perjury .. it has to matter directly)
ReplyDeleteIn fact, I don't even understand why there were there at all .... they have no direct knowledge of the actual crime. They have no way of knowing who did what, they weren't even witnesses, in my view.
Donna.....thanks!
ReplyDeleteI do understand the identity theft portion. I'm trying to figure out the definition of obstructing an FBI investigation...what did the kid do? By obstruction,I'm wondering if that means deleting electronic files, etc.
Wade Davis' jop is to do the best he can to defend his client. Not to attack Palin for us.
ReplyDeleteI am disappointed Wade did not "rip her a new one" on cross examination, HOWEVER, while that would have done a great deal to make US feel better seeing Palin caught lying, his attacking Palin would only anger those on the jury who are stil in denial about her evilness.
The ONLY question for WD is how best to defend his client, NOT how to bring Palin down.
Bringing Palin down would only make it look like they were "blaming the victim." I.E. no matther how evil Palin is proved to be, the ONLY qestion befor the court is "did Kernell do something illegal or not."
I do think it would have helped tremendously if WD showed the account WAS USED FOR STATE BUSINESS. But, again, I am NOT sure that is a strong enough point legally to keep Kernell from a guilty verdict.
Same with Levi. HIS priority is keeping things calm enough with ALL the Palin's to be able to see his son and not be defending himself from them ALL HIS LIFE. It is ONLY AFTER THAT, that Levi can afford to "bring her down" for the rest of us.
Remember too, despite Levi expanding his consciousness via Tank, new career etc, he is essentially the same, politically speaking, as all the Palin's i.e. he is likely still a very staunch conservative. HE WILL GROW AND CHANGE, unlike the rest of them, but his world view is more similar to general Wasilla population, despite knowing the inside dirt on Miss Sarah.
Don't rely on Levi to spill the beans for the rest of us.
Wade Davis has good reason for his actions, he IS a great attorney; he just represents Kernell, not us !
Whatever information was forwarded to the defense attorney was probably shared with the prosecution. If it became apparent (and probably did) that SP had perjured herself, they could have brought about a worse or greatly extended trialwith extensive cross examination. Perhaps her testimoney will be thrown out.
ReplyDeleteTo keep things at a minimum, the defense rests, an agreement is reached and we see what happens. Lets wait for closing arguments.
Archivist1000 - I agree with you! I don't understand Alaskans either! You had this totally corrupt governor and you act like it's business as usual. If my governor was doing these unethical, incredibly stupid things, people would be ready to string him up!
ReplyDeleteI know there has to be people in Alaska (Levi, Mercede, govt. employees and legislators, bloggers, etc.) who have damaging info about Palin, but for some unknown reason, are keeping silent. And as a result, Palin continues to get more bold and more dangerous.
Alaskans - if you are afraid of Sarah now, think about how much worse it would be if she became president!! Please do the right thing for yourselves as well as for our country! Tell what you know! Start the ball rolling!
So, Gryph, you think you know the case better than one of America's best lawyers? Charming.
ReplyDeleteAll the local coverage I've seen has been abysmal. It might as well have been the style section covering it. And I read of summary of the defense's 1 hour plus closing argument summed up in 3 sentences. Pretty sure we're missing a lot of info.
ReplyDeleteI am a lawyer and agree with what most of the other lawyers have said. This isn't about Palin. It is about what Kernell did or didn't do.
ReplyDeleteThe "charge" to the jury isn't the same as the criminal charges. The jury charge(s) are instructions to the jury as to what the law is. Often they are "if/then" statements: "If you find as a fact that the defendant did ___, then you must find him guilty." Things like that.
Putting the kid on the stand would allow the prosecution to hassle him about every naughty thing he ever did: smoke pot? underage drinking? The facts are few. The Palin circus was not particularly helpful to anyone, including the prosecution.
this kid has solid grounds for a re-trial if he is indicted.
ReplyDeleteDidn't Bristol tell the court that she was in the middle of nowhere or in the woods?
ReplyDeleteAccording to G. Sherman's article in New York Magazine, "When I visited in early April, the sound of whirring saws and hammers could be heard emanating from the trees, from the deck of the Best Western Hotel next door, which since the campaign, has served as a base camp of sorts for visiting press."
So, a Hotel close to the Palin residence, and during the campaign, lots of press there also too. They really take the cake. Am certain the jurors were wondering why a young 17 year-old pregnant girl would be left home alone without family members near, in the event of a medical emergency, or they'd have a back-up phone plan, in case of possible phone technicalities. Right.
Thank you lawyer@12:37 PM
ReplyDeleteWhat Palin said under oath at this trial can be used in a case against her?
U.S. District Judge Thomas Phillips denied defense motions to have instructions to the eight men and six women jurors include "lesser-included" offenses, except on one of the charges. If jurors decide to find him guilty of a misdemeanor instead, that would reduce the maximum possible penalty to a year in prison. Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark Krotoski said the evidence shows Kernell committed a felony, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer.
ReplyDeleteRead more: http://www.adn.com/2010/04/26/1250812/accused-palin-e-mail-invader-doesnt.html#ixzz0mFM1P43R
I do think it would have helped tremendously if WD showed the account WAS USED FOR STATE BUSINESS.
ReplyDelete=====================================
Not the issue, not here. The kid broke into her email looking for dirt, not trying to prove she was violating Alaska transparency laws.
Palin wins either way on this trial. If the not very bright college student gets a slap on the wrist, Palin does her "victim" routine. If the guy gets 50 years, Palin does her "I'm cleared of all wrongdoing" routine.
ReplyDeletePalin knew she could lie through her teeth in that courtroom because she'll win any way the court rules. AND Palin got another chance to shore up the "of course, Trig is my son" angle.
Palin even got a chance to further train daughter Bristol in the grifter arts and sciences.
Better luck at the next trial (it being Palin there will be a new trial soon).
Archivist 1000- face it Alaska never took her to task for anything, they were all in LaLa land with the most beautiful Gov. and believed all her crap just like the Pbots and Teabaggers do now. She's very good at pulling the wool over peoples eyes and only letting them see what see wants them to see.
ReplyDeleteThe Palin circus was not particularly helpful to anyone, including the prosecution.
ReplyDelete+++++++
Disagree. It helped the jury put a face on the crime, helped them understand that real people were affected by Kernell's actions.
Perhaps the judicial system in Tennesee is just as corrupt as the one in Alaska.The defense attorney, prosecutor, and judge know exactly what will happen because they got together and planned it. It does seem rather odd that Kernell did not testify to at least show intent. The defense may feel that talking about Palin doing some similar activities may make the jury think negatively of Kernell. The judge may also have not allowed such information to be presented, which is one of the ways they steer the jury to the verdict they want. This is a very sad case, especially in light of the crimes Palin's own children have been protected from and her own case of accesssing someone's email.
ReplyDeletemy guess is that there will be motions to dismiss, and failing that, a long closing argument laying everything out. i'm not a lawyer either but i believe that more often than not the defense does not put the accused on the stand.
ReplyDeleteAs an attorney with defense and prosecution experience, the attorney at 12:37 nailed it. There is no advantage to the defendant to attacking Palin; most of what she said is a collateral sideshow that is really irrelevant to the issue at hand. Likewise there is no upside and many downsides to having Kernell testify - the defense is NOT that he didn't do it, but rather that what he did is not in fact criminal. Nothing to testify about.
ReplyDeleteThe "charge conference" is where both sides and the judge negotiate jury instructions to be given. There are lots of terms of art that are obvious to the attorneys but not so much to the regular folks.
It's hard to people who haven't tried cases to understand perhaps, but nothing about this defense strategy as reported strikes me as anything other than first rate. All the grifting and dishonesty in which Palin engaged as governor of AK and since is beside the point to what is at issue in this trial.
Oh good lord people, the case was about defending Kernell, not prosecuting Palin. Wade Davies isn't here to nail Palin. Have you ever heard of hearsay? Hearsay is all that Gryphen and Mercedes are giving Davies. He can't use it. Look up the legal definition of perjury in TN - do you really think it applies to what Palin said? Do you really think Davies is going to turn his defense into a side show for prosecuting the Palin's?
ReplyDeleteOn a related note, I am tired of you people talking about Karma coming to get Palin. She made $12 million last year, how the f*** can you still believe in Karma. Do you think Santa crossed her off his list too? The world rewards nasty, greedy people like Palin, hadn't you noticed?
I'd just like to point out that generally whenever a defense attorney doesn't call their client to the stand, it means they're anticipating a positive outcome. Having a defendant testify is a sign of desperation.
ReplyDeleteWATCH 'COUNTDOWN' TONIGHT, WAPO REPORTER IS GOING TO SHOW HOW PALIN LIED ON THE STAND!!
ReplyDeleteDavid Kernell Wasn’t The Only One
ReplyDeleteSarah Palin email hack
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't MATTER if Palin lied on the stand, at least not to the defense ..... it's not perjury if the 'lie' isn't material to the case ....
ReplyDeleteHowever, it's good to have one more instance of Palin lying/exagerating, for another day... just not this day.
http://archivist.leapserve.com/sarahnews/lies-and-consequences-a-palin-saga-of-collateral-damage-ignored/#commentlist
I'd like to thank Donna and the other attorneys for 'talking me down' on this.
ReplyDeleteIf the defense has rested, that means they believe Palin cut her own throat on the witness stand.
ReplyDeleteBe happy. This will turn out well. I especially liked your post about the Tennessean's account of the Palin entourage leaving the court house. Palin has done herself no good here, none at all.
The next time the Wasilla Hillbillie Grifter kids breaks the law I hope they throw the book at those little skanky f'kers!
ReplyDeleteI said a few days ago that I didn't see the relevance of Palin & troop testifying in this case, and that is still what I think. I think they were only brought in to muddy the waters and impress the jury that IMPORTANT PEOPLE were involved. I am an attorney, although not a criminal defense attorney or prosecutor. As others have said, Kernell's attorney's job is simply to represent him and he has no reason to spend time cross examining witnesses that have no relevance to the case anyway. No matter how much we all may have liked that . . . I'm sure he knows what he's doing -- if you do criminal law for a few years, you not only know the strategies and the law, but you know the judges and the other attorneys involved and you have learned how to play it to your client's advantage. I hope the kid is either found not guilty or gets off with a light sentence. Either way, I do not think Palin's & her troops' testimony will have had any impact on the outcome. It's a tempest in a teapot!
ReplyDeleteIf this trial was being held in an area with bi-partisan views, I'd be less worried about the outcome for this young man. I'm concerned that the jury may have too many Palinbots on it although we know nothing of the sort.
ReplyDeleteIf Kernell's attorney had used damaging information regarding the email that truly had nothing to do with the case, it could have hurt the defendant further. Although I believe Palin lied, he couldn't go after her without going outside the areas pertinent to the case. It would only boost Palin's sympathy factor in the eyes of the jury if he attacked her in any way.
I'm hoping there are some people on the jury, even one, who can see that this is not about justice but about a prosecutor interested in making a name for themselves.
I keep thinking and I have all day while was at work..... I wonder if he is looking toward an appeal on the grounds that the prosecutions witnesses perjured themselves??
ReplyDeleteForgive me Gryphen: have to address troll above. One, we have proof. It is not all hearsay. Two, so her success is measured by the amount of money she has conned people out of this past year? Are you too one of her "oh so Christian" sheep. Have you ever heard of "money is the root of all Evil?" Do you think money buys happiness? It may, in the short term, but it will go away just like her looks.
ReplyDeleteI haven't read all the comments yet.
ReplyDeleteWTF indeed, but on the other hand, you also thought highly of levi's attourney... and he turned out to be the same with the child custody/support issue (no dealing whatsoever for visitation rights or other type of contingency - like Levi not making as much $ as last year, and potentially adjusting the support $$$ for Bri$tol...)
Does anyone know anything about this poster's comments? I've seen references to this "adopted child trust fund raid" a couple of times on KTVA's comment section but never heard about it anywhere else. Is this just a crank nut-job?
ReplyDelete"oh she left because of money - but it was money she stole from a trust account of her parents best friends child that was adopted...that is the truth..."
PRIOR POST: this kid has solid grounds for a re-trial if he is indicted.
ReplyDeleteRESPONSE: I know it's just semantics, but he's been indicted. Done deal. A re-trial would be for a mistrial. You don't get re-indicted.
And no, lack of cross-examination is not necessarily grounds for ineffective assistance of counsel, which is very difficult to show. And not have the defendant testify is DEFINITELY not grounds for ineffective assistance of counsel. Happens ALL the time.
I don't mind that some people don't know the legal system. I don't mind that it seems unreasonable at times and people questioning the wisdom of what is being done. It does bother me that people publicly judge and criticize those in the legal system without understanding the issues. It's happened on this case. It's happened on the child support issue.
I appreciate reading everyone's remarks regarding the Knoxville Trial. And, I agree that it is not Sarah Palin who is on trial, but David Kernell.Did he break the law and if so, what his punishment should be. I am reminded of some other famous (or infamous) court cases.
ReplyDeleteThere was the a young girl, Louis somebody from England who was a nanny accused of shaking one of the little boys in her charge. The boy died from trauma, but an over zealous prosecutor charged Louise only with murder, and would not allow a lesser charge of manslaughter. The jury could not find for the charge that would have brought her life in prison; she was acquitted. (Some said that they may have considered the lesser charge).
I am also reminded of another famous Tennessee case, The Scopes Trial which pitted two brilliant lawyers against each other, arguing whether evolution should be taught in the shcools, back in the day what that amounted to blasphemy in that bible belt part of the country. The famous lawyer, Clarence Darrow was not able to defend the Tennessee school teacher, and lost the case, but opened up a discussion that still has not been resolved in some parts of the US.
If we need to remind ourselves that even the most important judges make made decisions, look at the Supreme Court's recent decision allowing corporations unlimited funding in political campaigns. Yes, the Supreme Court has made other mistakes; The Dread Scott case. A doctor from the slave state of Missouri was serving at Fort Snelling, an army fort near Saint Paul, MN, and brought along his slave. The slave petitioned the courts for the freedome to remain in free Minnesota. The courts ruled against him, treating him like property, and forcing him to return to Missouri with his master. Law schools point to the error of the decision.
Oh yes, and then there was OJ. Who knows what will happen in Tennessee?
The most important fact regarding this trial is that David Kernell confessed. He stood up and clearly said yes, I did it - I was looking for something to use against her in the campaign...
ReplyDeleteSo no matter how we feel, out here in the blogs, about the roles that Sarah and her band of merry Palins had to play in all this, the bottom line is Kernell's attorney has an obligation to his client.
It just might be, understanding the Palins untoward influence on everything they touch, the defense thinks it can better serve this client by leaving any fact-disputes to closing arguements. That lessens the Palin impact, eliminates the prospect of more Palinesque drama, and allows the attorney the ability to make such statements as "Bristol Palin was never alone. She was never in danger. Nowhere in any scenario was there ever even a hint that the news my client caused a campaign derailment..."
And he'd get to state these facts as facts without the emotional sway of a rock-star entourage in the courtroom.
On the other hand, if he recalls them to refute their ridiculous exaggerations on the stand, all Sarah has to do is dig in her heels and insist her version is the truth, and then it becomes a he said she said thing and the facts get lost again.
If you believe at all in the concept of paying it forward, you've got to know Sarah's actions will eventually catch up to her. I just hope I get to see it :)
-OzMud
Who got to him and how much did it cost?
ReplyDeleteWould this kid have a chance at a mistrial or appeal due to the blatant incompetence of his attorney?
"Would this kid have a chance at a mistrial or appeal due to the blatant incompetence of his attorney?"
ReplyDeleteA chance, yes. Not a good chance, however. You'd basically have to prove that the defense attorney was passed out drunk in the courtroom.
Anyway, like I said previously, I wouldn't count the kid out yet. This attorney is confident for a reason.
Isn't this kid's father an elected state official? I find it hard to believe he would hire ineffective, hack counsel. There is a lot we don't know, we weren't there. There is bound to be some sort of punishment for this, but what I don't want to see is something insane just because Palin winked at the jury. That would piss me off to no end.
ReplyDeleteI can't stand that she and her family are getting away with all of these immoral things. Fleecing their flock for all they are worth. If that article in the New Yorker doesn't open a few eyes to her grifter ways, then probably only personal bankruptsy will. Keep giving 'til it hurts people. She's got a lovely compound up here in Wasilla!
Forever Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteANYTHING you say under oath can be used against you. That's why Clinton was impeached. NOT for having had the affair, but for having lied about it during a deposition on another matter.
anon @12:37 PM
ReplyDeleteSo...your saying its ok to perjure yourself...Ok great next time I get called to testify I will just lie, and If I get caught I will say , Hey will palin did it? Am I not a Rill 'murkin like her? And then I will sue and bring her as a witness!