If I understand this correctly, defense and prosecution gets nine preemptory challenges per defendant — nineteen times nine, or 171 each:
Am I correct? And how long would that take?
That’s only relevant to temporary stays. It sometimes comes up (like capital cases), but is not case determinative.
No. According to Georgia Code § 17-8-4 Procedure for Trial of Jointly Indicted Defendants, each defendant can get up to five additional strikes if the court decides to allow it. I’m very doubtful that they’d allow an additional 95 strikes for 19 defendants.
When two or more defendants are tried jointly for a crime or offense, such defendants shall be entitled to the same number of strikes as a single defendant if tried separately. The strikes shall be exercised jointly by the defendants or shall be apportioned among the defendants in the manner the court shall direct. In the event two or more defendants are tried jointly, the court, upon request of the defendants, shall allow an equal number of additional strikes to the defendants, not to exceed five each, as the court shall deem necessary, to the ends that justice may prevail. The court may allow the state additional strikes not to exceed the number of additional strikes as are allowed to the defendants.
The first is now on youtube (1.5 hrs)
Not sure how it works in Georgia state courts, but today I was proofreading a transcript of a pretrial conference for a Federal District Court criminal case held in Hawaii, and one item discussed was whether the prosecution and defense attorneys (three defendants) were satisfied with a questionnaire to be sent out to prospective jurors.
All being in agreement on it, the plan was for the attorneys for both sides to go over the answers returned, and meet to see if they could all decide on which possible jurors should be eliminated from the pool before impanelment.
Following that preliminary weeding out, when the trial began there would be the usual in-court jury selection process.
It could be a helpful process to follow in the Georgia case.
Oh, and nitpick: It’s “peremptory”. From the Latin “perimere”, meaning to take entirely, “Implying the removal of one’s option to disagree or contest something” in lawspeak.
What? That can’t be right…
[looks it up]
Goddamn, the English language can suck so much…
Aw, that’s one of its quirky charms.
I think it has essentially the same mean in everyday language - dictatorial, without giving reasons, demanding compliance without argument.
I have never used, nor heard used, “peremptory” outside of a legal context. If your mileage varies, your circle of acquaintances is linguistically rarified indeed!
Or lawyers, or some members of the sdmb.
Last night there was discussion of the ga hearing. One explained that ga has court terms. That a speedy trial request depending on when it was requested would toss it into the next term and so on, “training” the cases. Msnbc, last word.
Trials every 2 to 4 month into years is just as crazy as 19 at a time.
I’m doing just that today, in a Washington state case. I think it’s pretty common in many places for bigger cases.
“They are all so guilty, you can’t try them. It would take too long” Is an interesting argument.
Lol, it’s worse than that!
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23941366-jim-jordan-letter
ROFL, well, that’s him told!! Brava, DA Willis!!
So glad she wrote it with the contempt Jordan’s correspondence deserved. So often, and understandably, the message is clear but the tone muted. She might as well have opened with “Jesus Christ, Jordan, you’re an asshole,” given the message and tone of the rest of her response.
Good for her.
Be sure you read to the “voluntary responses” section, where she really lets loose.
Chairman Jordan, I tell people often “deal with reality or reality will deal with you.” It is time that you deal with some basic realities. A Special Purpose Grand Jury made up of everyday citizens investigated for 10 months and made recommendations to me. A further reality is that a grand jury of completely different Fulton County citizens found probable cause against the defendants named in the indictment for RICO violations and various other felonies. Face this reality, Chairman Jordan: the select group of defendants who you fret over in my jurisdiction are like every other defendant, entitled to no worse or better treatment than any other American citizen.
Here is another reality you must face: Those who wish to avoid felony charges in Fulton County, Georgia — including violations of Georgia RICO law — should not commit felonies in Fulton County, Georgia.
And it only gets better.
She could have, but the way she wrote it, with all of the citations and weight of case law, it just had so much more force. Reading that must have been like getting hit in the head with a hammer.
“Your letter makes clear that you lack a basic understanding of the law, its practice, and the ethical obligations of attorneys generally and prosecutors specifically.”
Well then.
I’m really curious if Gym will have the guts to respond in any fashion to that beatdown.
“… For a more thorough understanding of Georgia’s RICO statute, its application and similar laws in other states, I encourage you to read “RICO State-by-State.” As a non-member of the bar, you can purchase a copy for two hundred forty-nine dollars [$249].”
