Boy the federal court beat is...a little beat today.
Does it count as SD FL news that I saw Judge Moreno having a nice lunch at La Loggia yesterday?
No, guess not -- darn, where's Julie Kay when you need her?
Anyways, the always-in-trial big man already updated us on Joe Cool. Judge Huck set sentencing for May 6.
Third time's the charm in the Liberty 6 retrial, which is starting to feel like Jarndyce and Jarndyce -- only longer.
What do you all think of this line from the defense opening:
“This case is a 100 percent setup; this is a manufactured crime,” the lawyer, Ana M. Jhones, said in her opening argument, which drew several objections from the prosecution, most notably when she remarked that “taking an oath to Al Qaeda is not a crime.”True, but do must jurors think it should be?
And finally, more details on the IRS v. UBS showdown unfolding right here in sunny South Florida:
Anyone know who has been retained to represent UBS on this? I know a certain humble blogger who's available.
With today’s lawsuit, the U.S. asked a federal judge to enforce its so-called John Doe summonses. On July 1, a federal judge in Miami approved an IRS summons seeking information on thousands of UBS accounts owned or controlled by U.S. citizens. Negotiations between the U.S., Switzerland and UBS have been at a standstill since then, according to a Justice Department filing.
UBS said in a statement that it expected today’s filing.
“UBS believes it has substantial defenses” to the U.S. attempt to enforce the summonses and will “vigorously contest” the case, the bank said in the statement. The bank’s objections are based on U.S. laws, Swiss financial privacy laws, and a 2001 agreement between UBS and the IRS, according to the statement.
Have a great weekend all!