Strange request from Jayalaitha on her wealth case

Ponniyin Selvan wrote:asking the Supreme court not to replace the existing prosecution lawyer of Karnataka high court and not allowing the judge from the court in that case to retire.     Looks like she has already paid a hefty amount for getting a positive judgement and does not want that to go waste. 

IMHO nowhere in the world,  an accused has asked for the lawyer or judge of her choice to oversee her case. Very strange and funny that the Supreme court even entertains the petitions.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:rishi -- why are you such a shill for JJ? she is just another corrupt politician. maybe a bit smoother than the DMK's goons.

Rishi wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:rishi -- why are you such a shill for JJ? she is just another corrupt politician. maybe a bit smoother than the DMK's goons.

Max,

Jayalalitha was corrupt during her first five years of administration. She did amass wealth. But she learnt her lessson. AFAIK she does not engage in thievery now and has been providing good governance for the last two of her terms in office.

Compared to what Karunanidhi and the other members of the DMK gang stole, her crimes look like a molehill. The only problem was that she failed to cover her tracks in her first term.

Are you aware when she was the leader of the opposition, Karunanidhi encouraged his thugs to strip and molest her in the assembly? Thankfully the AIADMK members came to her rescue just in time.

Rishi wrote:

Ponniyin Selvan wrote:asking the Supreme court not to replace the existing prosecution lawyer of Karnataka high court and not allowing the judge from the court in that case to retire.     Looks like she has already paid a hefty amount for getting a positive judgement and does not want that to go waste. 

IMHO nowhere in the world,  an accused has asked for the lawyer or judge of her choice to oversee her case. Very strange and funny that the Supreme court even entertains the petitions.

The removal of the SPP seriously prejudiced the accused as defence had examined 99 witnesses, marked 384 documents and brought out the lacuna in the prosecution case, the petition said.

The change of the prosecutor would result in a “mis-trial” since the accused had already disclosed their defence by examining witnesses and marking exhibits. “Now, under the guise of appointing a new prosecutor, an attempt is made to reopen the case, with ulterior motives.”

The petition said the SPP was removed “only at the instance of the rival political party [DMK], which wields enormous influence on the ruling party in Karnataka which also is the ruling party of the Central Government. The rival party has been interfering with the prosecution right from the beginning. When they were unsuccessful in scuttling the trial in the courts they have resorted to this devious method of getting the prosecutor removed. The notification removing the SPP is completely arbitrary and politically motivated and shows that it has been passed only to satisfy the whims and fancies of the DMK whose support is extremely necessary for the continuance of the Central Government.”

The petitioners said: “Under the scheme of Cr.PC, a prosecutor is not a persecutor and is expected to act fairly and not at the dictates of political masters… The prerogative of appointing SPPs by the government is not absolute and the government cannot choose SPPs who have to act on their dictates.”ya

>>>  a valid argument.

Ponniyin Selvan wrote:

Rishi wrote:

Ponniyin Selvan wrote:asking the Supreme court not to replace the existing prosecution lawyer of Karnataka high court and not allowing the judge from the court in that case to retire.     Looks like she has already paid a hefty amount for getting a positive judgement and does not want that to go waste. 

IMHO nowhere in the world,  an accused has asked for the lawyer or judge of her choice to oversee her case. Very strange and funny that the Supreme court even entertains the petitions.

The removal of the SPP seriously prejudiced the accused as defence had examined 99 witnesses, marked 384 documents and brought out the lacuna in the prosecution case, the petition said.

The change of the prosecutor would result in a “mis-trial” since the accused had already disclosed their defence by examining witnesses and marking exhibits. “Now, under the guise of appointing a new prosecutor, an attempt is made to reopen the case, with ulterior motives.”

The petition said the SPP was removed “only at the instance of the rival political party [DMK], which wields enormous influence on the ruling party in Karnataka which also is the ruling party of the Central Government. The rival party has been interfering with the prosecution right from the beginning. When they were unsuccessful in scuttling the trial in the courts they have resorted to this devious method of getting the prosecutor removed. The notification removing the SPP is completely arbitrary and politically motivated and shows that it has been passed only to satisfy the whims and fancies of the DMK whose support is extremely necessary for the continuance of the Central Government.”

The petitioners said: “Under the scheme of Cr.PC, a prosecutor is not a persecutor and is expected to act fairly and not at the dictates of political masters… The prerogative of appointing SPPs by the government is not absolute and the government cannot choose SPPs who have to act on their dictates.”ya

>>>  a valid argument.

Haha.. valid argument .. my foot.. this is not the first time SPP has changed in this case with a history of 17 years. Because the last SPP, Mr Acharya was not amenable to pressure, he was forced to resign by the previous BJP led govt. in Karnataka. 

We know that you are a Jayalalitha fan. Just for fun, what is your argument in support for Jayalalitha wanting the judge overseeing the case to not retire on his actual retirement date.