Rubashkin Appeal Seeks New Trial

Tuesday January 4, 2011 5:13 PM - 8 Comments

rubashkinLawyers for Sholom Mordechai Rubashkin have appealed a judge’s decision denying their bid for a new trial.  In a brief filed Monday with the U.S. Court of Appeals in St. Louis, Mo., lawyers for Sholom Mordechai made four arguments on his behalf, chief among them that the presiding judge in his case, Linda Reade, should have recused herself. Reade had rejected that argument in October.

According to the brief, government documents that surfaced after Sholom Mordechai’s conviction and not made available to the defense showed that Reade was involved in the planning for a major federal immigration raid of the Postville plant in May 2008. Reade’s “excessive coziness” with prosecutors planning the raid raised doubts about her impartiality in the case, the brief says, and as a result Rubashkin is entitled to a new trial or, at a minimum, an evidentiary hearing.

The 2008 raid at the time was the largest immigration enforcement action in American history and led to a string of accusations. The bulk of those charges subsequently were dismissed.

The trial and sentence have been widely criticized by legal scholars for the zealousness with which federal prosecutors pursued the case.

{Jewish Journal/Matzav.com}

Email This Post Email This Post Print This Post Print This Post


Top Of Page

8 Responses to “Rubashkin Appeal Seeks New Trial”

1. Comment from bubby 1
Time January 4, 2011 at 8:12 PM

What happens if he is granted a new trial will it be by a judge or a jury? why wasnt he given a trial by a jury the first time?

2. Comment from Moshe2
Time January 4, 2011 at 10:20 PM

May all work out well and he should be granted a new trial or if true be let out free

3. Comment from Moishe
Time January 4, 2011 at 10:59 PM

From this post it sounds the appeal was only for appealing the judge’s decision denying their bid for a new trial. I think this is only one part of the appeal. Please correct.

4. Comment from ceo
Time January 4, 2011 at 11:35 PM

pray for the truth to be revealed.

5. Comment from MIESQ
Time January 5, 2011 at 9:54 AM

Dear Bubby 1the 6th Amendment to the US Constitution all criminal trials are trials by jury. The concern was the evidence disallowed by the trial judge and not heard by the jury. It is because Judge Reade was more than involved with scheduling and logistics and had an interest in having a guilty verdict come back.
After all on her approval ICE spent alot of money and resources how embarassing if there would be no convictions–So an appeal is very important to bring out the truth.

6. Comment from to bubby 1
Time January 5, 2011 at 11:37 AM

there was a judge AND jury at the first trial

7. Comment from to Moishe
Time January 5, 2011 at 11:39 AM

The best outcome from the appeal SMR’s attorney are hoping for is for the Appeals court to send the case back to the lower court

8. Comment from A Yiddinieh
Time January 5, 2011 at 11:56 AM

We are davening for you

Leave a Comment