I was back at the Alfred A. Arraj federal courthouse in Colorado on Tuesday for Tina Peters’ habeas corpus hearing.
It was a short hearing, a little under an hour — you can read my play by play here.
The bottom line of it all is that Peters' habeas petition will focus in on the First Amendment claims and the fact that she was denied bond on appeal out of fear for what she might say.
That fact should make Coloradans shudder.
The court asked both sides for new briefing on the First Amendment claims, specifically whether this federal court has the jurisdiction to grant Peters’ bond request in a state-level case. The way it was discussed, it seems unprecedented.
That process will take four to six weeks (realistically, expect six).
From there, the magistrate judge may order another hearing, or he may just give his recommendation to the District judge without further hearings. He requires more information before he makes his recommendation.
When he finally makes his recommendation, the district judge can accept or reject it.
There has been a crazy misalignment of expectations about this hearing — several people even asked me if Peters would be released Tuesday, after the hearing.
That was always unlikely to happen short of Providence. Court just doesn’t work that way (unless your a Maryland Man or a mentally would-be child abductor).
Expectations are future resentments, and justice moves slow. This case, at this stage, is actually moving — which is better than the alternative.
Note that Peters’ counsel is optimistic that “the truth will out” and “justice will be well served.”
I caught up with Peter Ticktin and asked him about the weaponization investigation as well as realistic expectations for the outcome of Tuesday’s hearing.
WATCH:
Your reporting and analysis is so vital and intelligent. A sharp contrast to the brain blinding media drones. Thank you.
Thank You 😁 Ashe ,Even if its just a nothing burger It still should have been news worthy.But even goid old Spin Master Kyle provided crickets 🙄