• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Giuliani gets first shot at excluding materials from raids

ouch

Air Muscle
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2020
Messages
10,185
Reaction score
8,886
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Who is to say that Giuliani won't take all of his materials back? Of course anything that implicates him will never see the light of day by Fed prosecutors or am I misinterpreting this ruling?



Giuliani gets first shot at excluding materials from raids

Rudy Giuliani and his lawyers will get to designate which materials seized from him will be reviewed by a court-appointed expert reviewer to determine what should never be seen by federal prosecutors
abcnews.go.com
Rudy Giuliani and his lawyers will get to designate which materials seized from him will be reviewed by a court-appointed expert reviewer to determine what should never be seen by federal prosecutors
 
Last edited:
It's the long game. He can pick anything he wants. And, the reviewer can release everything or nothing at all. We'll see.
 
No big thing. He can claim what he wants and the person doing the reviewing might differ with him.
 
bongsaway said:
No big thing. He can claim what he wants and the person doing the reviewing might differ with him.
Click to expand...
That's the part that confuses me though. When this is how it goes down right out of the gate: 'Rudy Giuliani and his lawyers will get to designate which materials seized from him will be reviewed by a court-appointed expert reviewed' - if said reviewer receives little to no materials. Giuliani's incriminating information will be withheld from that reviewer simply because both Giuliani and his lawyer will prevent that from happening. Is there something I'm missing here?
 
If rudy gets to decide what gets reviewed, nothing will be reviewed, so by my reasoning that's not what happens. I think it means rudy can claim this or that is not relevant and the court reviewer either agrees or disagrees. That's my guess. I don't think it means rudy gets to hide evidence.
 
This can't be how it works.
It would be like a murderer being able to go in and select what evidence from the crime scene he'd just to not be included like the body or all the blood sprayed everywhere.
 
Best wishes to Mr. G.

Many people (including me) do NOT care what he may have done during the Honorable Donald J. Trump's term.

Mr. G. will always be remembered for rolling back the horrific and disgusting and sickening violent crime orgy in New York City.

Was he in charge during Stop & Frisk?

Too bad the courts would not let the city continue that policy.

That's the only language bad people understand.
 
No big deal. Rudy and his lawyers get to look at the seized material and identify which items they recommend the prosecutor should not see or use in court.
A court appointed reviewer will make the final determination.
 
I like your interpretation much better than mine. Originally, it didn't make sense that (S/I/T) Giuliani could sort out the evidence that they have on him - then my lizard brain kicks in and begins to convince me that because (S/I/T) Giuliani is the great and mighty former governor of NY, w/lawyer, - they get to handpick the evidence to be used in court. I'm still reeling, somewhat, from a paranoidal 5+ years of (S/I/T) Trumpdom.
 
Last edited:
TheParser said:
Best wishes to Mr. G.

Many people (including me) do NOT care what he may have done during the Honorable Donald J. Trump's term.
Click to expand...
Just when I put away my shit boots - gotta put them back on again. Thanks for your contribution concerning evidence against (S/I/T) Giuliani.
 
Ah, at least you got some of the lizard dna to work. On the other hand my microchip which is embedded with artificial intelligence led me right to that conclusion. Sadly my lizard dna never kicked in. Lied to again by the R's.
 

Either things get turned right over, or they get reviewed to test his claim of privilege.

He doesn't get to simply hide things. The law would be an ass if it allowed that.
 
Is the ABC article right?
It’s not my understanding of how things are supposed to work, what’s the point of the raid if Rudy can cherry pick?
 
Rexedgar said:
It’s not my understanding of how things are supposed to work, what’s the point of the raid if Rudy can cherry pick?
Click to expand...
This is what I was wrestling with when posting the op. Several here have calmed my nerves down some. My next question is not only Giuliani but is this a common practice by suspects and their lawyers to have this privilege to pick through 'materials' seized in raids or directly collected on the scene of a crime by detectives to be reviewed and used in court?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…