No offense OP, but that is not what it means to “dismiss with prejudice”. To “dismiss with prejudicel means that the same legal claim can not be brought again against the same party. To “dismiss without prejudice”, means that the individual case is dismissed but it may be brought again in another case. The more you know....
Cases are usually dismissed “with prejudice” when the presiding judge sees no merit in the plaintiff’s/complaintiff’s case. Cases are usually dismissed “without prejudice” due to procedural mistakes in filings or motions. The former cannot be refiled, while the latter may.
In legalese “merit” is not defined as it is in common parlance. “Merit” in the legal sense, is a finding on the rights and wrongs of the individual case, not a judgment on the “fairness” of the case Itself. That issue would be resolved by an entirely different case.
It may be that another case is brought in the future by Flynn against their government for “wrongful prosecution”. Flynn would need to make that case though, independent of this case, and the burden of proof would be very high.
I'm not talking about a judgement of fairness, I'm talking about legal merit. The people who charged him presumably are lawyers familiar with the concept. Charged without merit.
I must not be making the differing concepts clear. When the judge dismisses this case “with prejudice”, the judge has made a legal finding that the case lacks the merit to be brought again based on the facts and evidence presented in that particular case.
The judge is not deciding that the prosecution lacked adequate reasons to bring the case in general. That would need to be determined by a different case.
I must not be making the differing concepts clear. When the judge dismisses this case “with prejudice”, the judge has made a legal finding that the case lacks the merit to be brought again based on the facts and evidence presented in that particular case.
Yes. That particular case which was one of the flagship case of this crack team of prosecutors with the full weight of the DoJ and Congress behind them, and virtually unlimited resources.
Clearly the charge was without merit.
The judge is not deciding that the prosecution lacked adequate reasons to bring the case in general. That would need to be determined by a different case.
They'll probably weasel their way out of it because they're corrupt swamp weasels, but the implication of this being dismissed with prejudice is clear to anybody.
It says it is being dismissed and it can't be brought again against the same party. The last ten words of my first sentence are substituted in the legal document with the precise legal formulation, "with prejudice."
Remember Rat Rosenstein's big emergency presser on this?
Let it not go darkly (and quietly) into the night...
While no one is paying attention, no less.
Never let a crisis go to waste.
https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1239687082160689152
Yeah they have Corona virus now. Fucking assholes.
No offense OP, but that is not what it means to “dismiss with prejudice”. To “dismiss with prejudicel means that the same legal claim can not be brought again against the same party. To “dismiss without prejudice”, means that the individual case is dismissed but it may be brought again in another case. The more you know....
That's the result of dismissing with prejudice. Why would a case be dismissed with prejudice?
Cases are usually dismissed “with prejudice” when the presiding judge sees no merit in the plaintiff’s/complaintiff’s case. Cases are usually dismissed “without prejudice” due to procedural mistakes in filings or motions. The former cannot be refiled, while the latter may.
Hm, no merit in the case yet they were charged anyway. Sounds pretty wrongful to me.
In legalese “merit” is not defined as it is in common parlance. “Merit” in the legal sense, is a finding on the rights and wrongs of the individual case, not a judgment on the “fairness” of the case Itself. That issue would be resolved by an entirely different case.
It may be that another case is brought in the future by Flynn against their government for “wrongful prosecution”. Flynn would need to make that case though, independent of this case, and the burden of proof would be very high.
I'm not talking about a judgement of fairness, I'm talking about legal merit. The people who charged him presumably are lawyers familiar with the concept. Charged without merit.
I must not be making the differing concepts clear. When the judge dismisses this case “with prejudice”, the judge has made a legal finding that the case lacks the merit to be brought again based on the facts and evidence presented in that particular case.
The judge is not deciding that the prosecution lacked adequate reasons to bring the case in general. That would need to be determined by a different case.
Yes. That particular case which was one of the flagship case of this crack team of prosecutors with the full weight of the DoJ and Congress behind them, and virtually unlimited resources.
Clearly the charge was without merit.
They'll probably weasel their way out of it because they're corrupt swamp weasels, but the implication of this being dismissed with prejudice is clear to anybody.
Do you realize how fucking stupid you are?
Only thing I realize by your comment is that you are a belligerent idiot. Keep talking so I can figure out more.
Did you read anything about the case or did you simply get snagged on dismiss with prejudice?
Not only did I read it, but I understood what it said.
So after you read the case, you are saying this case of posting memes online is not being dismissed?
Wut m8
It says it is being dismissed and it can't be brought again against the same party. The last ten words of my first sentence are substituted in the legal document with the precise legal formulation, "with prejudice."