Judges rarely ask prosecutors for exculpatory evidence. It is even more rare when they do so on their own initiative, without a motion from the defendant, seeking exculpatory evidence. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:
The federal judge assigned to the criminal case against Trump’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn has ordered Special Counsel Robert Mueller to turn over any “exculpatory evidence” to Flynn’s defense team.
Oddly, however, Flynn’s legal team did not make this request. Instead, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan issued the order “sua sponte,” or at his discretion, invoking the “Brady Rule” – which requires prosecutors to turn over previously unfiled evidence that might have a material impact on a defendant’s case. Interestingly, two days before the order Mueller filed a motion for an agreed-upon protective order regarding the use of evidence in the case, including “sensitive materials,” provided to Flynn’s lawyers by the office of the Special Counsel.
Judge Emmet G. Sullivan
As The Hill notes, Sullivan dinged federal prosecutors in the trial of former Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) for misconduct in failing to turn over exculpatory evidence.
The development has generated a significant buzz in conservative circles, with the implication being that perhaps Flynn might not have pleaded guilty in light of certain evidence.
Judge Andrew Napolitano addressed Sullivan’s decision on Tuesday, saying The judge on his own, not in response to any application from General Flynns lawyers says, “By the way, I want all exculpatory evidence, evidence that could help Flynn or hurt the government turned over to Flynns lawyers.”
Why would he we want that after General Flynn has already pleaded guilty? That is unheard of. He must suspect a defect in the guilty plea. Meaning, he must have reason to believe that General Flynn pleaded guilty for some reason other than guilt.
To continue reading: In Unexpected Twist, Judge In Flynn Case Asks Mueller For “Exculpatory Evidence”
