Flynn's former business partner was acquitted on all counts in his trial in Virginia. Judge noted:
He noted in the decision that the “jury was not adequately instructed as to the role of Michael Flynn in light of the government’s in-court judicial admission that Flynn was not a member of the alleged conspiracy and the lack of evidence sufficient to establish his participation in any conspiracy; and there was a substantial danger that the jury drew inferences against Rafiekian with respect to the existence of and his participation in the alleged conspiracy based on a belief that Flynn could be regarded as a member of the alleged conspiracy.”
Trenga noted in his decision that the government’s use of information that was related directly to Flynn in an effort to convict Rafiekian was wrong and that the jury “was not adequately instructed as to the knowledge element necessary to convict Rafiekian of a violation of Section 951, as charged in Count II.”
Flynn's attorney:
“Judge Trenga’s well-reasoned opinion reaches the only result that could be correct on the facts and the law in this case,” Powell said. “The prosecution was yet another attempt to criminalize an innocent business transaction. It was prosecutorial misconduct in more ways than one.”
Seems like prosecutorial misconduct is quite prevalent with government attorneys.
https://saraacarter.com/michael-fly...ter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=social-pug
He noted in the decision that the “jury was not adequately instructed as to the role of Michael Flynn in light of the government’s in-court judicial admission that Flynn was not a member of the alleged conspiracy and the lack of evidence sufficient to establish his participation in any conspiracy; and there was a substantial danger that the jury drew inferences against Rafiekian with respect to the existence of and his participation in the alleged conspiracy based on a belief that Flynn could be regarded as a member of the alleged conspiracy.”
Trenga noted in his decision that the government’s use of information that was related directly to Flynn in an effort to convict Rafiekian was wrong and that the jury “was not adequately instructed as to the knowledge element necessary to convict Rafiekian of a violation of Section 951, as charged in Count II.”
Flynn's attorney:
“Judge Trenga’s well-reasoned opinion reaches the only result that could be correct on the facts and the law in this case,” Powell said. “The prosecution was yet another attempt to criminalize an innocent business transaction. It was prosecutorial misconduct in more ways than one.”
Seems like prosecutorial misconduct is quite prevalent with government attorneys.
https://saraacarter.com/michael-fly...ter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=social-pug
