Because the government bears the burden of proof, the United States Attorney will have an opportunity to rebut the defense closing arguments yesterday. After that, Judge Juan R. Sánchez will deliver his closing instructions to the jury. He will inform them that both Edwin Pawlowski and Scott Allinson are presumed innocent, and can only be found guilty if the jury unanimously agrees that there is proof, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendants did what has been charged. He will define the elements of each offense charged and provide some general guidelines to follow in weighing the evidence. Then the case goes to the jury, the ultimate finders of fact.
A friend has ask me to discuss the following possibilities.
Like,Here's what I can tell you.
1) GUILTY on a majority of the counts! Then, what might happen next (e.g. appeals, and possible timeframe of such appeals). How long could this drag out? Another 2 years??
2) GUILTY on the few of the counts (like, the lying counts only)! Then what...possible public sympathy/judicial mercy because he "just told a few fibs"?
3) INNOCENT on all counts! Then, what are the possibilities of ANY further action against him? Or is it "case closed" nothing-to-see-here, go home everybody.
4) HUNG JURY. Forgive me, I'm not very legally endowed. Does that mean NOBODY CAN COME TO A UNANIMOUS AGREEMENT ON ANY OF THE COUNTS? Then, is this outcome the same as stated in #3 above? What are possible legal follow-ups to THAT outcome?
5) Does an appeal need to be "presented" for EACH COUNT that he might be found guilty of? What I'm getting at is IF HE IS FOUND GUILTY OF 13 COUNTS, he'd have to appeal each one individually, right?
6) So the more counts that he might be found guilty of, the more ONEROUS (and expensive, I imagine) his appeal process becomes, yes? Do lawyer's charge by the APPEAL? Or is this stuff "a package deal"?
There are two Defendants in this case, Scott Allinson and Edwin "Fed Ed" Pawlowski. If the jury has agreed to convict or acquit one, but is still deliberating as to the other, it can return with a verdict applying to the Defendant about which it has agreed. .
If unable to reach unanimous agreement on all counts, the jury may return a verdict on those counts to which it has agreed.
If unable to reach unanimous agreement about some or all of the counts, the judge can declare a mistrial as to those counts. After that, it will be up to the United States to decide whether to retry the Defendant on those counts.
No jury can declare a Defendant innocent.Only God can do that.A jury can only declare a Defendant "not guilty," which means the prosecution failed in its burden. If a jury returns with a "not guilty" verdict as to some or all of the counts, the case is over. Double jeopardy precludes a new prosecution.
Every single one of the 54 charges against Fed Ed are felonies and crimens falsi, that is, crimes involving some form of deceit. A guilty verdict on just one count means that Fed Ed will eventually be removed from office.There will be little public or judicial sympathy for a convicted liar.
Sentencing will likely occur within two or three months of the verdict in order to allow the probation office to prepare a presentence report and review the sentencing guidelines. Sentencing us when a conviction formally occurs. This is when Fed Ed would be removed from office. It is possible that he could remain in office for several months after the verdict. That's why the US Attorney will almost certainly demand a resignation, once a verdict is reached, as a condition of bail.
An appeal may be filed after sentence is imposed. There is no need for a separate appeal on each count. Because this is a five week trial involving hundreds of exhibits, an appeal would be ridiculously expensive and would very likely take several years. We would pay for it because Fed Ed will declare he is unable to foot the bill.
Whether it is a few counts or the whole shebang, fed Ed is looking at a double digit sentence. In addition to betraying the public trust, he tried to con everyone in a jury trial. While no defendant can be penalized for exercising the right to a jury trial, they can pay the proce for refusing to accept responsibility.
38 comments:
To be gracious, after Eds cross-examination, this guy is guilty on most counts. I'd say about 35-45. Anyone guilty of 35 felonies is up the creek. The only question is what length of time Ed will be sentenced to serve and what federal prison will he be sent to.
Thanks Bernie this is interesting.
I regret that I could not attend the trial, but even if I had attended, it sounds like I may not have found a seat. Wish there were a rule allowing cameras in courtrooms for trials involving corruption and honest services fraud. Would you support that?
So, does an appeal stall the sentencing process?
It’s been frequently noted that FedEd will only leave his office kicking and screaming, so if WE are most likely on the hook for the legal bill, why wouldn’t he go that route? He gets to stay in office, enduring no expense - until the appeal process is exhausted, no?
An appeal occurs AFTER sentencing and hence he will be removed from office a few months after the guilty verdict.
Duh! Guess I got fuzzy on the difference between conviction and sentencing.
So, I consulted Google: “Once convicted, the person has been proven or declared guilty of the offense. ... When sentenced, the convicted criminal is issued a formal judgment that usually pronounces the punishment. The convict can appeal the sentence, but a sentence usually takes effect while appeals occur.”
That word USUALLY bothers me; wonder if he can wiggle out of this in any way?
Let’s hope not! Thanks, Bernie
Lastly, I’ll respectfully disagree with you on the topic of public sympathy.
Even if FedEd was convicted on ALL COUNTS, I’m convinced he’d still have a surprising reserve of sympathy amongst his misguided/low-information followers.
12:44, it is common for most everyone, myself included to conclude that once a guilty verdict is entered, a person has been convicted. But technically, a person is convicted only when sentenced.
That’s under pa law. The state constitution does not consider someone convicted until sentenced. A state rep who pleaded guilty to money laundering used this excuse to stay in office until shortly before she was sentenced.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20160921_Gov__Wolf_calls_for_convicted_state_Rep__Acosta_to_resign__she_vows_to_stay.html
If FedEd claims poverty (declares bankruptcy), can he retain McMahon (and his hefty hourly rate) and force the taxpayers to pick up that tab? Any Federal guidelines on this?
No, McMahon will be out and he will get a lawyer thru the Federal PD Ass’n.
In that case Bernie, do you think Ed would have the cajones to claim in his appeal that McMahon committed some sort legal malpractice?
That could happen in the appeal or a later, collateral attack. That is quite common, actually. I could see an argument that McMahon was ineffective for letting him testify or for failing to file this or that motion. I feel fairly confident that any attack on McMahon would be rejected.
Likely outcome, hung jury, or possible guilty on charges of untruths, which could be appealed, and if no guilty finding on other charges may end up being overturned. He is a good party member and still only needs one juror to not find him guilty. A good Lawyer knows how to find that juror and appeal to him or her. He is a big city mayor and there must be some big city jurors.
Your summary of what can happen here, Bernie is very helpful. Thank you. The key is to get Pawlowski out of office as soon as possible. He is as much a blight on that city as its dirtiest neighborhood streets.
He admitted he lied to the FBI. Also, on at least one other count of lying to the FBI, he had no response, indicating he lied. Yes, everything can be appealed that is negative to him. As a trial junkie, who attended most of the sessions, I noticed that the judge was rather hostile against McMahon and "Fed Ed's" lying had more holes than Swiss cheese. Depending on the jury charge will determine the final outcome! In the worse scenario, he will be found guilty of lying to the FBI and suffer an adverse sentencing from the judge for wasting his time. This will probably occur 3-months after his conviction. Then, the city can finally try to rid this cancer from their government. However, I do envision a resignation as a condition of his bail at that time.
First and foremost, I think he is guilty of a lot of things and I hope he goes to jail for a long time. Having said that, I think he is gonna walk. There are some complicated charges here and a lot of them for the jury to go through. I can’t see them all agreeing to convict on any count (perhaps maybe one or two at the most if any) he is going to walk. You heard it here first
On a somewhat related note, I’m going to miss seeing Victoria Power in the courtroom every day. When I was there a lot of my attention was diverted to her lol
You ended your first paragraph by referring to FedEd as the King of Allentown. I know an individual who would object to that.....
Judge Stocklas is buying the drinks when FedEd is found guilty and, depending on how many guilty verdicts are imposed, the drunker we all become. Uber will be notified of potential upsurge in ride requests.
Here's Emily Opilo and Kayla Dwyer discussing the judge's instructions today to the jury:
https://www.facebook.com/mcall.lv/videos/10155491395267903/?notif_id=1519841506264273¬if_t=live_video_explicit
"amongst his misguided/low-information followers."
A direct swipe at democrats, Bernie. That is an oft used alt-right term on their blogs and tv station. We must realize their are voters of that type on both sides of the aisle.
Not a direct swipe at Dems. I know the person who posted that remark, and I am pretty sure he is either a Dem or middle of the road. The fact is Fed Ed won bc of low-information voters.
Canary, Can't make up my mind whether I like the tweets or those videos more.
Bernie do you agree that Fed Ed outright admitted at least twice on the stand that he lied to the FBI? Can anything mitigate that admission as the basis for conviction on at least those counts?
If at some point during deliberations Fed Ed wants to start talking a plea, could a plea happen?
I hear you Bernie, I guess I am hyper-sensitive. I hear that remark quite a lot on right-wing outlets when describes dems. In my mind many Trump supporters fall into that category. I am a victim of our current political purity system.
Morgan also addressed a central theme of McMahon’s closing that campaign adviser Mike Fleck and his employee Sam Ruchlewicz ran the alleged bribery schemes. McMahon illustrated it in the opening of a PowerPoint with animated curtains drawing back to “The Mike and Sam Show.”
“He didn’t roll the credits at the end,” Morgan said. “You know what those credits say? ‘Produced and directed by Edwin Pawlowski.’”
Ouch! Or as the kids say... "Burn"
4:15, I hear you, too. Perfectly understandable. But I know this guy and he may be an R, but has never in all the years I’e known him (60) been one to engage in identity politics. His only real flaw is his friendship with me.
Canary, he outright admitted to lies twice on Thursday and again on Monday. What is worse, on Monday he got caught in a lie.
I'll guess there will be enough (perjury) to cause his departure from office, thus doing what Allentown's voters failed to do.
VOR
Bernie, in a room on south west corner on Hamilton street yesterday, it was described as a thriving metropolus of economic development. Tonight in a somber city counsil chambers the faked factual data put to print was telling a different story about economic development being I think 260 something in the redd?
Some were there is no truth to this as driving to any other part of the city to all four corners. The only thing I see is blight and degredation, and yea there is areas that have many people moving about. I am here to point out that feet on the street doesn't make for genuine tangiable commerce that can be calculated on some governmental spreadsheet. Yesterday as prosicutor pointed out at the end of REdirect fed edz powerpoint express was hard at work for the defense with even a American Flag flying?
Both sides never seemed to mention that not only is the jury obligated to both sides, but there is also the unspoken obligation to the public as a whole to be protected from such monsters and there accomplises, all not just the two being indicted currently!
A man of God is innocent until proven guilty. If he is found "not guilty" he is therefore what he was when he walked in, innocent!
So is a man "not of God" guilty until proven innocent? And if he is found innocent, is he therefore what he was when he walked in, guilty? Just trying to follow your logic there, Pastor Numbness
Meant Pastor Numbnuts.
9:23 pm is that pastor numbnuts part of the lehigh county's vatican of church on the on the run?
REpublican redd, not a party favor
humanist by design
6:00 PM Pawlowski guilty on 47 charges!!!
Chicago Politics at its best! two scumbags; The Mayor and Mike Fleck! Anybody who dealt with Fleck knows what he was like! And now you can see the outcome
despite already knowing the verdict, In regard to your response to your friend's questions, I believe a defendant can be retried on 'hung' counts. It's not all or nothing. A defendant cannot be retried on counts he/she were acquitted on. Im summary, if a judge decides to accept a 'partial verdict', double jeopardy will not attach to the hung counts.
After listening today to FedEd’s resignation speech, it now appears that one obstacle (money for legal representation to continue on with an appeal) has been removed. I’ll be looking forward to the Judge’s next pronouncement/decision!
I’m starting to wonder (read: worry) if I’ll live long enough to see the final desired outcome of this case.
Wrascally rabbit!
Post a Comment