Also Tuesday, DeGuerin criticized Earle at a Houston news conference, accusing him of offering "a sweet deal" to DeLay's co-defendants, John Colyandro and Jim Ellis, to get them to testify against his client.
Ellis' lawyer, J.D. Pauerstein, of San Antonio, said prosecutors made offers but they were inadequate.
"I didn't perceive anything they offered as acceptable, let alone sweet. They were talking in terms of wanting to put these poor guys in jail," Pauerstein said.
So Earle offered Delay's co-conspirators "deals" that did not include a walk. That's extremely significant because if Earle were really interested in what I suggested earlier, a guilty plea from Delay in return for a light sentence (such as a year and a day suspended), he would be offering the little guys much better deals, that is, immunity from prosecution.
Instead, Earle is offering the guys deals that suggest that he has them by the balls. If he really does, Delay could actually go to prison for a serious term, which is almost unthinkable given his level of power. Also keep in mind these are state charges, so we're not talking "Club Fed" here. We're talking real hard time, year after year in a little tiny cell. I hate Tom Delay and even I get a little queasy thinking about that. Prison is no joke.
2 comments:
Of course, if the man is as black with crime as you are always saying (and I have no reason to think otherwise), why wouldn't the prosecution play the big game?
This is also consistent with DeLay's portrayal of the affair as a vendetta. Unfortunately for him, it's apparently a legally persuasive vendetta.
Oh, there's no question in my mind that it's a vendetta. Earle hates Delay. That's just indisputable. But it's not a partisan vendetta; Earle is a district attorney, after all. He's not the Democrattiest Democrat.
Earle has been chasing Delay for years. He's never been able to pin him down for a variety of reasons. But now it looks like he's got him dead to rights (see next post...)
Post a Comment