Why were seven superseding indictments filed with inflated allegations and a forfeiture demand?
After a hearing held in January 2009, the District Judge found insufficient evidence to keep Rubashkin in prison as a “flight risk” and ordered his release pending trial. In the meantime, the Iowa prosecutors had begun ballooning the immigration and bank-fraud charges with a series of superseding indictments. The following is a list of the dates and number of counts of the superseding indictments: First Indictment November 13, 2008 3 Counts Second Superseding Indictment November 20, 2008 12 Counts Third Superseding Indictment December 11, 2008 13 Counts Fourth Superseding Indictment January 15, 2009 97 Counts Fifth Superseding Indictment March 31, 2009 79 Counts Sixth Superseding Indictment May 14, 2009 142 Counts Seventh Superseding Indictment July 16, 2009 163 Counts The basic charges of immigration-law violations and bank fraud remained the same throughout this entire series of indictments. In the Third Superseding Indictment the prosecutors added the request that the entire Agri bu
Related Questions
- Is it necessary for a Party against whom a Complaint in respect of a CN domain name or Chinese domain name has been filed with the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC) to respond?
- How are allegations handled when filed against a program with CARF accreditation?
- What cases have been filed at the Public Utilities Commission?
