Patrick Kane to possibly appear before Grand Jury

[HuskyBruinPride]

I know the last thread was closed until further updates, and I didn't see a thread on this yet but thought this was worthy of discussion

http://www.buffalonews.com/city-reg...to-a-grand-jury-multiple-sources-say-20150904

If enough evidence is found to move forward with proceedings is it inevitable Kane will be suspended (like Voynov was)?

Click to read more...

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

I have seen no indication Kane will testify in front of grand jury at this point

 

[Took a pill in Sbisa]

That link doesn't work

 

[EbonyRaptor]

The title of this thread is misleading. There is no news that Kane either will or will not testify before the Grand Jury. The story is that there will be a Grand Jury investigation and that others will be called to testify. Kane may or may not be asked to testify, but it is voluntary on his part. I'm unclear if it is within Kane's right to request that he be given the opportunity to testify, or if it must be by invitation from the DA that Kane can then either accept or decline.

 

[HuskyBruinPride]

That link doesn't work

works for me

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Works 100% fine for me. Not sure of these 'sources' but it makes sense.

 

[DearDiary]

In your rush to post this thread, did you bother to actually read the article? The title is very misleading

 

[Devil Dancer]

It's still significant news in the case.

 

[TrillMike]

Link works for me too. Very interesting to see where this goes.

 

[Led Zappa]

Link works for me.

"I would give both Kane and the woman who made the accusation an opportunity to tell their stories before the grand jury.”

 

[Beerz]

The title of this thread is misleading. There is no news that Kane either will or will not testify before the Grand Jury. The story is that there will be a Grand Jury investigation and that others will be called to testify. Kane may or may not be asked to testify, but it is voluntary on his part. I'm unclear if it is within Kane's right to request that he be given the opportunity to testify, or if it must be by invitation from the DA that Kane can then either accept or decline.

1. If your client wishes to testify before the grand jury, you must send the prosecutor a written notice of your client’s intent to testify. (CPL 190.50[5][a]). If the prosecutor is presenting on short notice, do your notice by email and fax, with an explanation included that you cannot send the letter by U.S. mail because of the short notice you received.
Some attorneys send these notices on each case both in order to preserve the client’s right and to preserve any potential issue of the prosecutor presents the case without providing the defendant with the opportunity to testify. But if you choose to engage in this practice, you must notify the prosecutor if your client is not testifying before the grand jury, as your client will be body-ordered to the grand jury, and may be left sitting, without you there, initially bewildered and eventually angry.
2. Often, it’s a bad idea for your client to testify before the grand jury. You don’t yet know the evidence the prosecutor has in the case, you don’t yet know whether your client’s version varies greatly with that evidence or with any statement s/he may have made to the police, the client’s testimony can be used at trial, the grand jury is likely to indict any case the prosecutor presents to them, and you may be revealing more than you should to the prosecutor prior to trial, allowing the prosecutor to try to prepare the witnesses to refute your defense. There are exceptions to the bad idea rule, but not many. (I should note that some of my colleagues engage in a more vigorous and less conservative grand jury practice than I do, with greater success.)

http://newyorkcriminaldefense.blogspot.com/2013/12/basics-of-grand-jury-practice.html

N.Y. CPL. LAW § 190.50 : NY Code - Section 190.50: Grand jury; who may call witnesses; defendant as witness

(a) When a criminal charge against a person is being or is about to be or has been submitted to a grand jury, such person has a right to appear before such grand jury as a witness in his own behalf if, prior to the filing of any indictment or any direction to file a prosecutor's information in the matter, he serves upon the district attorney of the county a written notice making such request and stating an address to which communications may be sent. The district attorney is not obliged to inform such a person that such a grand jury proceeding against him is pending, in progress or about to occur unless such person is a defendant who has been arraigned in a local criminal court upon a currently undisposed of felony complaint charging an offense which is a subject of the prospective or pending grand jury proceeding. In such case, the district attorney must notify the defendant or his attorney of the prospective or pending grand jury proceeding and accord the defendant a reasonable time to exercise his right to appear as a witness therein -

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/CPL/TWO/I/190/190.50

 

[JuniorNelson]

He's got a lawyer. The process will be handled professionally.

I do not believe he will be exposed to media. He is too big a liability with media around. He will either sit or be suspended before camp. As details emerge from the Grand jury proceedings Kane will become toxic.

It is my feeling that the charges will proceed. The one-sided nature of Grand Jury inquiry is indicative. It means they do not care about damaging Kane's reputation. They are confident that they will not be exposed to liability. They have their ducks in a row.

 

[dechire]

I can't see him attending camp while this is going on and it has a fair chance of extending into the season. I expect to see him suspended if this is still on-going by October

 

[the_fan]

Hawks will miss the playoffs if they lose Kane too, they already lost too many key players

 

[Super Cake]

Link works for me.

"I would give both Kane and the woman who made the accusation an opportunity to tell their stories before the grand jury.”

I doubt Kane testifies in front of the grand jury.

 

[KrisLetAngry]

Hawks will miss the playoffs if they lose Kane too, they already lost too many key players

Off topic

However they lost players and got new players who could possibly make an even bigger impact

 

[HFBS]

The conventional wisdom is that the accused should not testify before the grand jury because their attorneys do not want to be locked into that testimony for a possible trial. That generally supposes their clients are guilty or there is reasonable doubt. I have seen accused testify openly at grand juries and not be indicted.

 

[93LEAFS]

I doubt Kane testifies in front of the grand jury.

Yeah, only way he would is if he ignored the legal advice he's given. Way too high a chance of self-incrimination to make the risk worth it.

 

[Stad]

Hawks losing their best player for a significant amount of time could cost them a playoff spot this year IMO.

 

[SAADfather]

Hawks losing their best player for a significant amount of time could cost them a playoff spot this year IMO.

Both Keith and Toews are healthy and expected to be at training camp...

 

[Zrhutch]

Off topic

However they lost players and got new players who could possibly make an even bigger impact

You're essentially trying to replace ~200 points (Saad, Sharp, Kane, Richards, Oduya, etc.) with Trevor Daley, Ryan Garbutt, Artem Anisimov, Marko Dano, and Panarin. Dunno if I'm missing anyone else. You can understand the skepticism.

 

[Samuel Culper III]

You're essentially trying to replace ~200 points (Saad, Sharp, Kane, Richards, Oduya, etc.) with Trevor Daley, Ryan Garbutt, Artem Anisimov, Marko Dano, and Panarin. Dunno if I'm missing anyone else. You can understand the skepticism.

Anisimov = 40
Panarin = 30
Tikhonov = 30
Daley = 25
Dano = 30

Those are conservative estimates. Dano and Panarin could easily hit 40 each and Daley could post 30+

That adds up to 155 and that's without Kane being suspended and the Hawks possibly making a move/having some money to at least do something like sign Stempniak for one year (which could add another 40 points).

Not really too crazy.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

(* I am misusing legal terms so humour me... *)

Is it like on TV where it is easy for the prosecutor to get a Grand Jury to convict and send it to trial? I almost remember the line from Law and Order (paraphrasing), "You could get a cheese sandwich past the Grand Jury".

 

[tsanuri]

(* I am likely misusing legal terms so humour me... *)

Is it like on TV where it is easy for the prosecutor to get a Grand Jury to convict and send it to trial. I always remember the line from Law and Order (paraphrasing), "You could get a cheese sandwich past the Grand Jury".

It isn't that easy but yes a DA can get an indictment more often than not. That is because all the grand jury does is decide if there is probable cause to proceed. They aren't deciding guilt. So the burden of proof isn't really high.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

It isn't that easy but yes a DA can get an indictment more often than not. That is because all the grand jury does is decide if there is probable cause to proceed. They aren't deciding guilt. So the burden of proof isn't really high.

Thanks.