At 08:22 PM 4/4/01 -0700, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>In my article that I wrote yesterday evening, I said that the judge was
>reasonable. He did not live up to that billing today.
>
>Judge Tanner simply said no, and didn't give much reasoning. He thought
>these were old accusations and had little relevance to the current trial.
>Bell's attorney said he was not required to show relevance before having
>subponeas served, but Tanner didn't seem to care.
>
>At this point, Bell may not have *any* defense witnesses. The government
>has put on about a dozen so far, rapid-fire.
>
>Also the judge sealed the *entire court file* including publicly-available
>motions, just because someone (ahem) was posting some of the documents on
>the Net. DOJ's London started complaining at the end of the trial today,
>and then got even more than he asked for.
>
>Citing that ruling, Tanner's clerk refused to give me a copy of the
>government's 3/30 pre-trial brief. (I can't get it through the court
>clerk's office since Tanner has the file.)
This is looking more and more like a Kangaroo court every day. If this
were picked up by the mainstream press perhaps many would start to wonder
of Bell's idea wasn't so crazy after all.
steve
