Need info...a woman who committed financial fraud agaisnt me (89 counts) has been indicted by the grand jury for two other drug charges. The DA told me he was going to present the financial charges by "accusation" and there is no need to go back to a grand jury with the financial charges. Is this correct and what does that do to the strength of the fraud case.
Thanks
2007-03-23 04:15:58 · 3 answers · asked by tricia q 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The state where crimes occured is Georgia and while I don't think I am entitled to victim's assistance, there is still the issue or reimbrusing both the bank and credit card company,as they made good on the funds.
2007-03-23 08:06:14 · update #1
What state are you in? This is important in answering your question. (For example, in some states, misdemeanors don't need to be indicted; the DA can merely allege them in something called an information.)
What I think the DA was communicating to you was that your specific case will not be presented to the GJ, but it would be used as evidence at the trial on the other counts. It is a lot of time for the DA to get evidence of all of the crimes, so they will indict on some and use the evidence of the others if the need arises. What this means for you (if I'm understanding what the DA), is that the crimes committed against you, if felonies, will not be charged against this defendant. She might be looking at so much time on the drug charges that he didn't think it was worth his resources to charge her on that.
However, if you are looking to get restitution, this might be important. Since the crimes committed against you are unindicted at this point, there might be a bar on you recovering from the State's Victim Compensation fund (if your state has one). If you are out any $, i would speak to the DA about how you will recover that. He might make a plea on the drug charges conditional on paying you back for the direct losses resulting from the fraudulent conduct.
2007-03-23 04:25:34 · answer #1 · answered by elvez 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"Accusation" or "information" are other ways to press charges, other than a formal "indictment" before a grand jury.
Different jurisdictions have different rules for what (if anything) needs to go through a grand jury, and what can be charged directly by the prosecutor. But in both cases, they go to trial.
2007-03-23 11:34:20 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no clue, not gonna guess either
Thinking more about that Fedral thing, they fired some judges, now if it doesn't get to trial is it becase they fired them judges? Anyway, its smells sort of rotten to me when they fire judges, then say they are unwilling to even say why.
Anyway, next maybe they say no more voting, they will just pick the next President, and won't have to answer why. Or maybe they just agree to tell a few folks why, not on camera and no recording.
2007-03-23 11:23:48 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋