a guy called jeremy hammond

JC29856

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Hammond

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/new ... e-20121207

A federal judge has refused to recuse herself from the closely watched trial of jailed computer hacker Jeremy Hammond, an alleged member of the group "Anonymous" charged with hacking into the computers of the private intelligence firm Stratfor and turning over some five million emails to the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks. Hammond’s lawyers had asked Federal Judge Loretta Preska to recuse herself because her husband worked for a client of Stratfor, and himself had his email hacked. Hammond’s supporters say the Stratfor documents shed light on how the private intelligence firm monitors activists and spies for corporate clients. He has been held without bail or trial for more than nine months. We speak with Michael Ratner, president emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights, about Hammond’s case.

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/12/27/ ... my_hammond

JimmyV

JC29856 wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Hammond

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/new ... e-20121207

A federal judge has refused to recuse herself from the closely watched trial of jailed computer hacker Jeremy Hammond, an alleged member of the group "Anonymous" charged with hacking into the computers of the private intelligence firm Stratfor and turning over some five million emails to the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks. Hammond’s lawyers had asked Federal Judge Loretta Preska to recuse herself because her husband worked for a client of Stratfor, and himself had his email hacked. Hammond’s supporters say the Stratfor documents shed light on how the private intelligence firm monitors activists and spies for corporate clients. He has been held without bail or trial for more than nine months. We speak with Michael Ratner, president emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights, about Hammond’s case.

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/12/27/ ... my_hammond

Judges should step away at the first whiff of a conflict of interest. Even if the accused is guilty, or even especially if the accused is guilty, this leaves the door wide open to an overturn on appeal.

(Not saying Mr. Hammond is guilty or not. I do not know and am speaking in general of all judges.)

peacefrompaul

JimmyV wrote:

JC29856 wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Hammond

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/new ... e-20121207

A federal judge has refused to recuse herself from the closely watched trial of jailed computer hacker Jeremy Hammond, an alleged member of the group "Anonymous" charged with hacking into the computers of the private intelligence firm Stratfor and turning over some five million emails to the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks. Hammond’s lawyers had asked Federal Judge Loretta Preska to recuse herself because her husband worked for a client of Stratfor, and himself had his email hacked. Hammond’s supporters say the Stratfor documents shed light on how the private intelligence firm monitors activists and spies for corporate clients. He has been held without bail or trial for more than nine months. We speak with Michael Ratner, president emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights, about Hammond’s case.

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/12/27/ ... my_hammond

Judges should step away at the first whiff of a conflict of interest. Even if the accused is guilty, or even especially if the accused is guilty, this leaves the door wide open to an overturn on appeal.

(Not saying Mr. Hammond is guilty or not. I do not know and am speaking in general of all judges.)

Yep. She needs to be removed from the case