https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2023/08/25/former-trump-lawyer-sidney-powell-demands-speedy-trial-in-trump-georgia-election-interference-case/?sh=4f1d00f535ba

She and another defendant both filed for a speedy trial.

Question for the legal minds.

If they are not found guilty how does this play into RICO charges against the other defendants including Trump?

Good question. Sidney's case involves the alleged "computer trespass" in Coffee County, GA. Now I don't know what they were able to find out there but it's no secret there were some major issues with the tabulators and QR Code Failure messages.

Isn't the fact these cases exist evidence of fraud? Aren't administrators required to allow access to voting systems as a matter of public good?

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Isn't the fact these cases exist evidence of fraud? Aren't administrators required to allow access to voting systems as a matter of public good?

---

Not when the owners of the electronic voting machines claim proprietary information and trade secrets on their software.

I had posted an interview of Gabe Sterling from August 2020 wherein he discussed being able to reset parameters on Dominion's machines that directly affected the number of ballots sent to adjudication. Hos goal was to send more to adjudication where the votes could be changed, rather than less.

In light of recent revelations about the Sec of State's office coordinating with the ACLU for reviewing absentee ballots and sending them to adjudication. He even mentioned that Fulton County had secured a 6.5 million dollar "grant" to hire more people. That "grant" was Zuckbucks.

So why would any government enter into a contract where the information within the machines can't be pulled? Aren't there laws obligating them to produce complete voting data on request?

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

So why would any government enter into a contract where the information within the machines can't be pulled? Aren't there laws obligating them to produce complete voting data on request?

---

Not really. States can set their own parameters for whether or not certain systems are approved by their state's experts or they can just accept that a certification by EAC, a federal agency. That agency is a revolving door of electronic systems' former employees and executives. Further the EAC often depends on the reports of one of only two certification companies, S&L and Pro V&V, which again are quite cozy with the voting system companies.

It's pretty much inside baseball with a side of being a racket.

Now Texas insisted on conducting their own tests on Dominion machines and rejected them for use in our state but other states do not always conduct their own

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Isn't the fact these cases exist evidence of fraud? Aren't administrators required to allow access to voting systems as a matter of public good?

---

I think that they are generally required to keep them secure.

Letting others have access to them is very much the opposite of that.

When will a decision be made on whether to severe these cases from each other and have multiple trials as opposed to doing them all at once?

jt2hunt said:

---

https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2023/08/25/former-trump-lawyer-sidney-powell-demands-speedy-trial-in-trump-georgia-election-interference-case/?sh=4f1d00f535ba

She and another defendant both filed for a speedy trial.

Question for the legal minds.

If they are not found guilty how does this play into RICO charges against the other defendants including Trump?

---

It is counter-intuitive, but if some of the conspirators are not guilty it does not effect the case on the other conspirators. Now, as a practical matter, the prosecutors may take a step back and re-think their case(s).
Typically prosecutors want to try their best cases first. Once those cases are won the other defendants fall in line and plead guilty.

With that said, this is not a typical case.

rwpag71 said:

---

When will a decision be made on whether to severe these cases from each other and have multiple trials as opposed to doing them all at once?

---

That is in flux right now. We have one order setting Chesebro for trial alone in October. Fani Willis filed for moving all of the rest of cases against the other defendants up to that date in October. Still outstanding.

But there is also a removal petition to federal court that has not been heard and ruled upon.

Whenever the judge decides.

rwpag71 said:

---

When will a decision be made on whether to severe these cases from each other and have multiple trials as opposed to doing them all at once?

---

I believe it already has been decided.

Chesebro is set for trial October 23. Court specifically said that date did not apply to any other defendants.

Quote:

---

Fani Willis filed for moving all of the rest of cases against the other defendants up to that date in October. Still outstanding.

---

That will be denied. Court won't make any defendant that doesn't want to go to trial that fast go.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

Fani Willis filed for moving all of the rest of cases against the other defendants up to that date in October. Still outstanding.

---

That will be denied. Court won't make any defendant that doesn't want to go to trial that fast go.

---

Agreed. It was a dumb move on her part. It took her two years to build what there is of her case, expecting defendants to go to trial in a few months. There was a real flurry of filings triggered by Chesebro's moving for his speedy trial, with judge setting a calendar for his trial in the middle of the day.

Trump's lawyers have filed a motion in opposition to moving up his trial per Willis' request on the same day too. it was a legal food fight with all of the filings.

rwpag71 said:

---

When will a decision be made on whether to severe these cases from each other and have multiple trials as opposed to doing them all at once?

---

I am not a lawyer and I am not particularly knowledgeable on Georgia laws, but I seem to remember reading an article that said it would be up to the Judge the case is assigned to to decide whether or not to sever the cases, with input from the DA, whom I suspect will be against severing the cases.

Those requesting speedy trials just speed up the process for all, IMO. As Trump's usual strategy is to delay, delay, delay, these requests hurt that strategy. As most defendants are paying for their own lawyers, delaying the trial for one defendant (Trump) unfairly costs the others increased legal fees. I wouldn't be surprised to see this used to support denying excessive delays.

So if the early defendants say that Trump as behind the scheme and so they thought it was legal and Trump doesn't get to have his own lawyer in the court to argue otherwise, does that establish facts for the trials of the other defendants?

And anything Trump responds with in public can be used against him hen he goes to trial?

eric76 said:

---

So if the early defendants say that Trump as behind the scheme and so they thought it was legal and Trump doesn't get to have his own lawyer in the court to argue otherwise, does that establish facts for the trials of the other defendants?

---

No. They'd have to testify to it at Trump's trial. It only establishes facts for the trial in which the testimony is given.

Quote:

---

And anything Trump responds with in public can be used against him hen he goes to trial?

---

Yes

aggiehawg said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

Fani Willis filed for moving all of the rest of cases against the other defendants up to that date in October. Still outstanding.

---

That will be denied. Court won't make any defendant that doesn't want to go to trial that fast go.

---

Agreed. It was a dumb move on her part. It took her two years to build what there is of her case, expecting defendants to go to trial in a few months. There was a real flurry of filings triggered by Chesebro's moving for his speedy trial, with judge setting a calendar for his trial in the middle of the day.

Trump's lawyers have filed a motion in opposition to moving up his trial per Willis' request on the same day too. it was a legal food fight with all of the filings.

---

"Dumb?" I believe it will be denied, too. But it harms her not one bit to make the ask and force the defense to have to start putting indications on paper and start answering questions from the judge about what timeline they think they'd need