A Win for Tom DeLay
June 27th, 2007
Isn’t it a shame that we could once again see a rogue prosecutor, fueled by politics, be responsible for the reputation and career of a man being ruined? Time will tell if Ronnie Earle managed this case in the same manner as Mike Nifong did his.
Court refuses to reinstate charges against DeLay
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals today refused to reinstate criminal conspiracy charges against former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay and two co-defendants.
DeLay, R-Sugar Land, and political consultants Jim Ellis and John Colyandro were accused of conspiring to violate state election laws in the 2002 elections for the Texas House. But lower courts threw out the indictment on grounds that conspiracy to violate the election code was not a crime until 2003,
A majority of the Court of Criminal Appeals agreed.
DeLay, Ellis and Colyandro were charged with plotting to funnel illegal corporate campaign contributions to several Republican House candidates in 2002, when the GOP gained its first House majority of modern times.
The three also were charged with money laundering, but a trial on those charges has been held up pending a resolution of the conspiracy charges.
DeLay’s attorney, Dick DeGuerin, said he was pleased with the ruling but sorry that it took so long and resulted in DeLay’s resignation from Congress, where he represented Houston’s southwest suburbs for more than 20 years.
“Ronnie Earle indicted Tom DeLay for a crime that didn’t exist, wasn’t on the books,” DeGuerin said.
Please do not misunderstand me here, I do not think Tom DeLay is a choir boy, but neither are most politicians at any level today. Won’t it be interesting to see if the money laundering charges hold up now that the main portion of Mr. Earles case has been defeated?
More here, here and a HT to MacRanger for pointing me to this story.
Update: The Courts Decision is available through a link at Redstate.
Written by Sue
Posted in 3 Responses to “A Win for Tom DeLay”
This brings the Libby case to my mind. We know Fitz lied or at least misled the appeals panel hearing Libby’s appeal by implicating Judith Miller and having her jailed when she had no information to provide.
I wonder what the appeals court will decide now when they look at the facts of the case and see Fitz knew before the investigation who the leaker was and did not indict him because apparently it wasn’t a crime. So why go on with an expensive investigation when you know who committed the crime?
It seems Fitz belongs in the rogue prosecutor category along with Earle and Nifong.
I agree and that appeals court decision will be a most interesting one.
I hope if they decided against Libby the President will commute the sentence and allow the judicial process to play out.
I have often wondered how Richard Armitage lives with himself having withheld, even from the President the fact that he was the first to name Valerie Plame. Makes one wonder about both his and Colin Powells departure from the State Department.
David,
If you visit today, after reading the law about criminal conspiracy regarding campaign funds took effect in 2003 and DeLay’s actions took place in 2002, does that mean Ronnie Earle was guilty of trying to use ex post facto on DeLay and, if so, could anything happen to Earle for doing that?
Thanks.