By Bangkok
K.R. Claviger’s assessment of Keith Alan Raniere’s appeal has the appeal of raw, unadulterated crap.
He pretty much took target practice at Raniere’s attorney Jennifer Bonjean and her legal abilities.
Jennifer Bonjean
Yet he wound up giving her a 50% chance of having oral arguments scheduled, which means her appeal is TWICE as strong as the average appeal.
Duh, Claviger.
He claims that Bonjean’s chances of having oral arguments scheduled aren’t based on legal merits —- but ONLY because of the ‘salacious’ nature of the case.
But that’s BULLSHIT because appellate judges aren’t gonna waste their time scheduling oral arguments IF the appeal has NO MERIT WHATSOEVER like Claviger claims.
If it had no merit whatsoever, they’d just SHIT ON Bonjean and dismiss every point she makes without oral arguments.
Nobody likes to waste time for nothing. Judges included.
Thus, Claviger’s basically admitting (indirectly) that Bonjean’s appeal may actually succeed and has some pretty good merit —— else he wouldn’t have said it had a 50% chance of having oral arguments scheduled (which is DOUBLE the rate of the average appeal).
Ha!
George Robert Blakey, 85, is an American attorney and law professor. He is best known for his work in connection with drafting the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and for scholarship on that subject.
Also, there’s no way that G. Robert Blakely taught Claviger at law school for two reasons…
1) Claviger went to law school back before WWII.
2) G. Robert Blakely never taught at the NON-PRESTIGIOUS Brooklyn Academy of Law (where both Claviger, and Cousin Vinny, graduated from).
Next point…
The truth about Bonjean’s appeal is that her arguments are meant to gain traction with judges who feel that the RICO statute was TWISTED & CONTORTED in this case —— and was used to squeeze a square peg into a round hole.
The RICO statute was meant for mafia leaders, drug cartels and other street gangs (prostitution rings, etc.).
It wasn’t necessarily meant to prosecute one horny guy, where the statute of limitations had run out on everything but RICO.
Bonjean is just trying to offer a legal ‘PRETEXT’ for any judges who may think that the RICO statute was used inappropriately here.
You see, judges can’t overturn a RICO case just because they are pissed off at the ‘motivations’ of prosecutors —– even if they secretly wanna do that.
Keith Raniere may have been horny but horniness is not RICO.
However, if Bonjean offers them ‘legal grounds’ to overturn the conviction —— then they may use those legal grounds as a PRETEXT for doing what they secretly wanna do anyway (i.e., to shit on the government for twisting RICO on its head in this case).
We all act on PRETEXTS. So do judges.
Have a wonderful day.
