Brian Blair’s campaign violation hearing set for this week could be postponed
July 28, 2009 at 11:40 am by George Niemann
By George Niemann
PoHo contributor and R-LAND and UCAN activist
In April 2009, former Hillsborough Commissioner Brian Blair opted to go for a full hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) to settle the charge of accepting illegal campaign contributions from Hillsborough Planning Commissioner Hung Mai and another political supporter. In February 2009, the Florida Elections Commission found “Probable Cause” that Blair intentionally violated campaign laws.
The final hearing was set for Wednesday in Tallahassee before ALJ Jeffrey B Clark. But a source there tells me that a one-time 30-day delay may be granted in the case. [UPDATE: On Wednesday we learned that is exactly what happened. The judge in Blair’s case just issued a ruling on the motion filed to send the case back to the elections commission. He denied the motion and set the new court date for Sept. 9. And get this, the trial is being moved to Tampa!!!]
The prosecution has been gathering evidence to show “willfullness” to violate the law. The evidence includes testimony of many witnesses in the case, in addition to the financial evidence of the money changing hands. As the state prepares to go to trial “loaded for bear,” Blair’s attorneys have now begun filing numerous motions to stop the trial from happening. It’s apparent that the tactic they’re following is, let’s hit ‘em with every motion we can possibly think of and if that doesn’t work, we’ll dazzle ‘em with bull****! Oh, and for those that are wondering, the law firm that Blair picked Is not Dewey, Cheatum, & Howe. As it happens, all of their attorney’s were tied up with traffic court and slip and fall cases, so he has decided to go with attorneys from a legislative/lobbyist group called Tidewater Consulting.
Some of the B.S. that’s been filed:
Copy Submitted of Commissioner Half-Truth Hagan’s campaign violation case -
Blair’s attorneys have even sent the judge a copy of the results of Half-Truth Hagan’s campaign finance violation case, in which the Elections Commission had to dismiss the case because they couldn’t sufficiently establish “willfulness”. What’s up with that tact? He’s, in effect, saying to the judge, “Hey, they dismissed my buddy’s case, so why can’t you dismiss my case?” Huh?
Motion to Relinquish Jurisdiction -
Basically he’s asking the judge to send the case back to Elections Commission to let them decide his fate. As a defendant, he was given a choice to allow his fate to be decided by either the Elections Commission or an administrative law judge. He chose the administrative law judge (possibly thinking that the prosecution would not be able to build a solid case against him). Through the legal process of discovery (the disclosure of information held by the opposing party in an action) Blair has, in all likelihood, learned that his goose is cooked based on the evidence. So now he wants to revert back to being judged by the Elections Commission, or shall we say, his peers (commissioners that hold appointed positions by way of politics). As Church Lady would say, “Isn’t that con-v-e-n-i-e-n-t”. It ain’t gonna happen, though.
Prosecutors Response to the Relinquish Jurisdiction Motion –
The prosecutor calls Blair’s motion to send the case back to the elections commission “forum shopping.” He refers to the idea of asking to go back to the previous step just as you’re about to go to trial a “second bite at the apple.” Which the law does not allow.
