Lawyers for former Democratic New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez petitioned Manhattan federal court Wednesday to overturn his bribery conviction and grant him a new trial.
The request comes after prosecutors admitted that jurors accessed tainted computer evidence during deliberations, necessitating a new trial. According to In the defense's submissions. Menendez's lawyer, Adam Fee, argued that “serious violations” warranted a new trial.
Mr. Fee argued in his filing that the defective exhibits are important and represent the only evidence linking Mr. Menendez to military aid to Egypt. They argue that the government's attempt to shift responsibility has no legal or factual basis, citing the impracticality of reviewing nearly 3,000 exhibits in just a few hours, and the government's commitment to properly label exhibits. Pointed out reasonable expectations.
'A death sentence is very likely': Jonathan Turley says Bob Menendez could face long prison term if convicted pic.twitter.com/tUwZiFyAtJ
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) July 16, 2024
The defense argued that treating this oversight as a waiver could encourage prosecutorial misconduct.
“The government had a right to expect that it was not misrepresenting unintroduced exhibits or constitutionally prohibited exhibits as permitted exhibits. If this is treated as a waiver, the parties “This would provide an incentive to intentionally seek rapid waivers,” the filing states.
Menendez was found guilty in July on 16 charges, including bribery, for allegedly accepting bribes to facilitate U.S. military aid to Egypt. He resigned from the Senate in August and is scheduled to be sentenced on January 29th. (Related: Weak candidate and convicted felon are the only Democratic senators not supporting Harris)
During the trial, prosecutors alleged that Menendez accepted $100,000 worth of gold bullion and $480,000 in cash from three New Jersey businessmen in exchange for political favors. Earlier this month, prosecutors said some court documents contained unredacted information that U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein had previously excluded to protect Congressional speech under the Constitution's Speech and Debate Clause. It was revealed that
Prosecutors argued that defense attorneys had reviewed and approved the document on the laptop before it was used by the jury, and that no further action was needed despite the error. They suggested that it was unlikely that the jury had seen the defective exhibits given the other evidence presented, and found them to be of minimal importance and redundant.
All content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent, nonpartisan news distribution service, is available free of charge to legitimate news publishers with large audiences. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and DCNF affiliation. If you have any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
