BeforeItsNews only exists through ads. We ask all patriots who appreciate the evil we expose and want to
help us savage the NWO with more Truth to disable your ad-blocker on our site only so we can grow and expose more evil! Funding
gives us more weapons! Thank you patriots! Oh and If you disable the Ad-blocker - on your deathbed you will receive total
consciousness. So you got that going for you...which is nice!
El Chapo Trial: More insight into Emma's cell gate as prosecution withdraws request for sanctions
Monday, December 10, 2018 9:51
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.
Chivis Martinez for Borderland Beat
Wanted sanctions all around
The prosecution has withdrawn their request for sanctions against the defense team, over prohibited cell communications allegedly implemented between Emma Coronel and El Chapo.
The motion was withdrawn “without prejudice” meaning it is not dead and could be refiled.
In reading the motion one is given a greater insight as to what exactly the prosecution is saying.
Although there are two defense players pointed out in the scenario, the government wanted the entire team to be sanctioned.
Here is what the government claims;
That they have evidence establishing a substantial likelihood that SAMs [special security measures] and courthouse rules were violated by providing a cell phone to the wife of El Chapo Emma Coronel, inside the courthouse, then visiting Chapo in the attorney-client room with a second cellular to facilitate contact between.Prosecutors say this occurred on November 19thobserved by security and security footage.
The prosecution points out that the declarations of defense team affirming they did not engage in this act, nor provided a prohibited person a cell, it points out that defense team attorney, Mirio Colon did not.There is no filing from Colon.There is a filing from Michael Lambert who says he did allow Emma to use his phone in order to use the translation app to answer Emma’s questions about the proceeding.
How it was done contend the prosecution:
Byproviding a cellular telephone to the defendant’s wife inside the courthouse, and then visiting the defendant in the attorney-client visitation room with another cellular telephone to facilitate unauthorized contact between the two.
“The defense affidavit is silent when it comes to whether provided Ms. Coronel a telephone elsewhere in the courthouse. The implication is once again clear: gave Ms. Coronel a telephone in the courthouse.
Defense claimed it would have been impossible to communicate as there is no cell service in the attorney client room. Prosecution says this is not so.
This is based on “the United States Marshals Service testing the signal strength of Verizon and Sprint cellular telephones in the visitation area. These tests revealed that Sprint received service and Verizon did not. While highlights that co-counsel’s Verizon telephone lacked, service in the visitation area, affidavit is silent as to the fact that actually matters—whether any of the three telephones regularly brought into the courthouse”
The government picks up on the fact the defense specifically says they did not send messages from the visitation room, and the phone in question did not send or receive messages, but does not say the same or mention the other three phone. However, it must be pointed out that was the contention to begin with, the visiting room.
So cell-gate is most likely dead.Dying with the defense saying “not me” and the prosecution saying it is “likely” something happened.
What a waste of time and effort, since there were two private sidebar discussions with the judge about this specific issue, resulting in resolve….or so thought.
