Comments on: The Arrest of Alex Sanchez: Part 4 – The 2nd Bail Hearing

By: Sure Fire

Sure Fire — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 02:19:00 +0000

Sanchez wouldn’t be the first former gangster to play both sides so I think it’s wise to err on the side of keeping him in custody until the tapes are heard. If like Tibby says the AUSA doesn’t produce them let him bail.

Real is a pussy cat compared to some of the other judges at 312.

By: Tibby Rothman

Tibby Rothman — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 05:18:09 +0000

I don’t know what the evidence is here, have no thoughts about guilt or innocence, but I’d lay money that those tapes WON’T be heard as part of a bail hearing.

My guess is, the reason why the prosecution sought a delay is it would give them time to generate a legal argument as to why the tapes should not be heard in open court prior to trial.

By: Marc Cooper

Marc Cooper — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:09:03 +0000

This is an excellent report, Celeste. I imagine that the very fact that the judge is considering bail on August 17 is a relatively good sign. He seems to be taking this all VERY seriously whereas most judges would have just gaveled down the bail request in a murder-related Rico charge. Indeed, as said above, the airing of what’s on those tapes will be explosive — either way. I know Alex and I find the charges against him hard to believe. If the govt has manufactured the charges, it SOUNDS like we might know that for a fact as early as Aug 17. I suppose that is the only really good news here. Thanks for ur work on this.

By: don quixote

don quixote — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 17:10:31 +0000

A US Federal Attorney in court on a murder conspiracy trial and bail hearing without any evidence or proof of the charges against Sanchez? Just a bunch of hearsay and jibber jabber, No sign of the the mysterious tapes, no transcripts (either in English or Spanish), can’t get them because Heckle in Westwood gave them to Jeckle in Northridge who gave them to who? Rosemary Woods!
Someone should have called for a mistrial right then and there, a Federal Prosecutor showing up in court empty handed and then when given adequate time to produce the evidence starts pissing backwards and stuttering and mumbling?
And in the meantime Sanchez gets to sit in the cooler for another month before the US Prosecutors get their shit together?
Sanchez should have at least been released on bail.

By: flip

flip — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 17:09:23 +0000

that is pretty funny about the prosecutor not knowing the judge spoke spanish. But I’m wondering how much (if any) advance notice do lawyers get about the judge presiding over their case. If they are alerted in advance… I mean, the guy looks pretty old. Somebody in the fed’s office should know that he speaks spanish. You’ve prepped so much for the case, isn’t it a good idea to do a little work about the judge?

By: mark

mark — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:13:07 +0000

The tapes are going to be dynamite – either way. They will either blow the case against Sanchez out of the water, or they will settle the issue of Alex Sanchez’s guilt. It’s a pity that we have to wait until August 17, but the judge spoke.