comments

1. #1    The wingnuts all express contempt for this Second Act in the Don Siegelman story, saying that he was, after all, convicted by a jury of bribery, the charge itself briefly described in this article. As much as I would love to man the barricades for this Democratic governor of Alabama, whose trial was obviously arranged by Rove et al. in order to throw his election, we gotta deal with the wingnuts' point, that he was convicted by a jury in open court. I have heard his putative "crime" described as the sort of arrangement that politicians in America routinely make without legal trouble, but my worry is: did the jury get it right for once?
   written by jeffreydj since 618 days 20 hours 40 minutes
2. #2    No the jury did not get it right. Siegelman never received any payments nor benefitted personally. A contribution was made to the state lottery to benefit education -- not to Seigelman. Also, the donar had been appointed to the same position by Republican governors previously. The "bribery" was manufactured. Also, there were jury irregularities.
   written by mvictoria since 618 days 17 hours 33 minutes

trackbacks

• (no trackbacks)
•  según Technorati