Re: Vick's Va. dogfighting trial can wait

"Bo Raxo" <crimenewscenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:zOqdnWVAifMM3tLVnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"MaryL" <stancole1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:484e6f9e$0$4072$bbae4d71@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Chocolic" <chatter448@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:H3o3k.33267$102.17842@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

There is a law, the "right to a speedy trial" that kicks in once a person begins serving a sentence in another case.

Doesn't hinge on serving a sentence in another case.

> It has to be the choice of Vick and the co-defendants to waive that > right, not the prosecutor.


That was my thought, too. States sometimes seem a bit oblivious to this right, but it seems to me that an overt announcement like that could set the stage for an eventual challenge or appeal. Incidentally, the right to a speedy trial is higher than ordinary law -- it's the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Defendants routinely waive it, if they're out on bail. Delays can benefit the defense (memories get fuzzy, witnesses move away or die).

That's true, but the article the OP cited infers that the *prosecutor* made this decision (and that was the reason for my comments).

One of the really smart moves O.J. Simpson's legal team did was to refuse to waive the speedy trial right, surprising the hell out of the prosecution. They forced the d.a. to go to trial much faster than they expected or would have liked, and were underprepared as a result. A year of delay and they would have had more evidence, too, like the photos of him in the Bruno Magli shoes.

Bo Raxo