He’s baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack
OJ is back in the news again
From the Desk of Mace
Walter Alexander and Charles H. Cashmore said they will testify against Simpson and three other co-defendants, and will include in their testimony that guns were used in the alleged robbery.
In return for Alexander's cooperation, Clark County District Attorney David Roger promised to seek a suspended sentence on a charge of conspiracy to commit robbery, according to Clark County Court spokesman Michael Sommermeyer.
Earlier Monday, Cashmore appeared before Judge Joe M. Bonaventure and said he would plead guilty to an accessory to robbery charge, court information officer Michael Sommermeyer said.
Clark County District Attorney David Roger announced in court that Cashmore would testify against Simpson and four others. Cashmore is scheduled for arraignment on October 23.
Simpson, 60, and the others were arrested last month in connection with the alleged armed robbery of sports memorabilia, including many items the NFL hall-of-famer and onetime murder defendant said were his own property.
Simpson has said no guns were used and he was merely retrieving sports memorabilia belonging to him. After the hearing, Cashmore's attorney Edward Miley, told reporters his client waived his right to a preliminary hearing, The Associated Press reported. "He can establish who was in the room, what was said, who had guns, who didn't have guns, potentially who may have
seen guns, who didn't see guns," the AP quoted Miley as saying.
David Copperfield the Magician extraordinaire is being investigated by the FBI, who once again are notoriously tight lipped. About why they searched his warehouse. That would happen if they put him in jail? Would he disappear? IF they shackle him, he will probably escape. For the same reason, they can’t lock him in a box, wait and see.
The Government usually tires to hide embarrassing information and squeeze information from those who have it they do this with impunity and viciousness. Remember those journalists that were imprisoned all because they would not reveal their sources? But help is on the way.
The Free Flow of Information Act would bar prosecutors from forcing reporters to disclose the names of anonymous sources, though there are exceptions. Reporters could still be jailed for contempt if they failed to testify under subpoena in cases where their testimony could prevent serious injury or death, or if they witnessed illegal activity. The government could also
compel testimony from journalists if it can convince the courts it's a matter of national security Nevada and 32 other States currently have similar laws. "That protection was lacking at the federal level".
Prosecutors frequently call in reporters to ask them about matters of which their own investigators are already fully aware. A prime example is the recent federal prosecution of vice presidential Chief of Staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. Prosecutors already knew who told what to whom. In fact, they'd already determined no crime was committed in revealing that
Valerie Plame was a CIA operative. So why Mr. Libby was still grilled? Why did New York Times reporter Judith Miller spend 85 days in jail for refusing to name sources of information when the government already knew there'd been no crime?
Because the real goal was not to discover who had committed any crime. The real goal was political punishment for the supposed "crime" of talking to the press. Without the willingness of reporters to protect their sources, we might never have read about conditions at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center; prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib; even the White House's involvement
in that little burglary at the Watergate.
The opposition to this law has little to do with police or prosecutors who can locate bad guys only by peering over a reporter's shoulder. It has a lot to do with a recurring desire to chill the ardor of whistle-blowers to "spill the beans" over government corruption and wrongdoing by letting them know any reporter they talk to can be thrown in the clink till
he or she gives up that source's name.
This is not a bill primarily about reporters' privileges or convenience. This bill -- well-named, for a change -- is primarily about how much the public will get to learn about matters that our hulking government agencies would rather keep quiet.
Take that President Bush, it doesn’t look like you’ll be able to veto this one. Maybe there is hope for us all again Cya next time
Mace Yampolsky is criminal defense lawyer located at 625 South Sixth Street Las Vegas Nevada 89101. His office number is 702-385-9777. His website is www.macelaw.com. His column appears weekly in this newspaper. If you would like to comment on this article, he can be reached by email at mjy@macelaw.com