> This afternoon USDistrict Judge Koeltl dismissed as "void for vagueness"
> the first two counts of the indictment of Lynne Stewart.
This does sound like a substantial victory. BTW, John, are you involved at all on the sidelines in this defense?
> Also remaining are counts 4 and 5. Count 4 alleges a conspiracy - under
> the general old conspiracy statute (18USC§371) - to defraud the US of
> its ability to keep its prisoners incommunicado! Sections of the
> dismissed big conspiracy count are realleged to assert that the sheik
> communicated with the outside world through his interpreter and through
> Lynne Stewart's comments to the press. Count 5 alleges a false statement
> to a federal officer, the "false statement" being Lynne Stewart's
> promise, made as a condition of her being able to talk with her client,
> that she would help keep him incommunicado with the outside world.
That's very clearly put. In the NYT story, Stewart said she hoped both these charges would be dismissed "as a factual matter" next month. Do you think there's any chance of that?
Also, can you explain what obstacles exist to the government appealing this judgment? I would imagine they're rarin' to.
Michael