[RealJustme]

HOUSTON – A Texas Court of Appeals in Austin has overturned the conviction of former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, attorney Brian Wice told KVUE sister station KHOU 11 News.

DeLay, 66, was convicted in 2010 for his alleged role in a scheme to influence Texas elections.

He was found guilty of money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering after he was accused of helping funnel corporate money to Texas candidates in 2002.

In documents released early Thursday, however, an appeals court said the evidence in the case was "legally insufficient to sustain DeLay’s convictions."

"I’m very happy about it," DeLay said in Washington Thursday. "I’m so glad they wrote the ruling about it because the ruling says I never should have been charged, much less indicted."

The court said all judgments against DeLay were reversed, and the former congressman was formally acquitted.

For both DeLay and his critics, the process was frustratingly slow, due in part to some of the appeals court justices in Austin recusing themselves as well as DeLay’s successful effort to have a judge on the panel removed because of anti-Republican comments she made.

DeLay was sentenced to three years in prison, but he stayed free while his case made its way through the appellate process.

[Clownkicker]

"Tom Delay vindicated of trumped up charges."-RealTool :lol:

"the evidence in the case was "legally insufficient..."

This is neither a vindication, nor does it prove the charges were "trumped up".
As RealTool knows, it just means they couldn't get the weasel on the evidence even though we all know perfectly well that he is guilty.

[RealJustme]

it just means they couldn't get the weasel on the evidence even though we all know perfectly well that he is guilty.

Not guilty, means not guilty, live with it!

[sillydaddy]

Tom used the," If I go down....you go down with me," defense.

[Clownkicker]

Once again, RealJustme doesn't know the meaning of simple words.

VINDICATE -- Look it up, moron.

[elklindo69]

A jury convicts the guy under the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" and now an appellate court, 2-1 overturns the jury 12-0 claiming, the evidence was insufficient???????????????????

[johnforbes]

The thing is, the jury system has long been inadequate.

There were debates 40 years ago as to whether America should have professional jurors with enough experience to absorb some legal knowledge and to sorta supplant their raw emotion with some bit of objectivity.

[sillydaddy]

Don't have to use professional jurors, just take jury selection out of the hands of the lawyers and problem is solve. Lawyers always pick jurors that will give them a favorable verdict.

[RealJustme]

The same people who vote over 90% of the time based upon the color of a politician's skin, are the same type of people who will vote not guilty 90% no matter what the evidence based upon the color of skin. Decisions of guilt should be by a judge, our jury system is broken and bias.

[elklindo69]

The same people who vote over 90% of the time based upon the color of a politician's skin, are the same type of people who will vote not guilty 90% no matter what the evidence based upon the color of skin. Decisions of guilt should be by a judge, our jury system is broken and bias.

A defendant can request to have either a trial by jury or judge.

BTW...juries are a defense that the citizenry has against a tyrannical government, especially those prosecutors who happen to bring up trumped charges against people.

[RealJustme]

BTW...juries are a defense that the citizenry has against a tyrannical government,

You just made the tea party's point!