|
|
Are you sure you want to report the following content as a violation?
|
|
|
|
Does anyone know why City Attorney David Smith pled the 5th amendment at Monday's hearing? He has alleged there was a "cover-up" in the Ratcliff case, and had been issued a subpoena. He filed a motion to squash it, but when the judge asked questions, he pled the right agaisnt self-incrimination. Why??? Perhaps because he helped fuel the uproar around the Ratcliff case (as if it needed more fuel)by making some pretty irresponsible statements that can't be backed up? And why didn't the Advocate report that their motion to have the subpoena that had been issued to them squashed was denied by the Judge? Or did I miss that information? I did not know any of this until I watched our local TV news. It's good to have another source of information besides the Advocate....which is involved in the case itself.
|
|
|
|
Please check the following violations, and include anything else in the comment box. |
|
|
| Comment |
|
|
| Captcha |
|
Please enter the text from the image above
|
|
|
