Post #325
"Factually, it seems extremely difficult to prove the judge’s intent — you would have to show she knowingly and materially obstructed a criminal investigation. Simply using one courthouse door over another, especially when the defendant was immediately apprehended, makes it very hard to argue there was an effort to obstruct justice.
It also doesn’t resemble classic cases of harboring a fugitive, where someone actively hides or protects a known fugitive to prevent apprehension. Here, the defendant remained in a public place — first in the courthouse, then just outside it — and was still in plain view of law enforcement.
Proving the necessary intent on the judge’s part seems highly unlikely. Additionally, the statute being used could be challenged as unconstitutionally vague, depending on how it’s applied here.
In short: this appears to be a tenuous legal and factual case."
```````````````````````````
I've asked for particulars re the laws she is supposed to have broken, and which specific actions taken by the judge violated the laws, but....crickets.
Moreover, that it was the judge who directed some of the agents (not all of them) or took them herself to her superior's office for guidance mitigates against an intent to obstruct law enforcement.