Former Trump adviser Roger Stone on Monday dropped his appeal to seven felony convictions related to the federal government’s Russia collusion investigation. The request was submitted by Stone’s lawyers to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, about one month after President Trump commuted his 40-month prison sentence.
H/T: Just The News
“My attorneys have convinced me that the odds of victory were slim," Stone wrote on his website. It is time for me to move on with my life with my family, friends, and supporters.”
Given the risk and the chances to prevail in a politically corrupted system I could not justify having to raise the hundreds of thousands more to pursue the appeal, given that I would never get a fair appellate hearing and that even if I were to win the appeal, the best case scenario would be a repeat of a trial marked by the complete denial of my constitutional rights. All in front of a judge who has invested herself in my conviction in order to try to send a political message that supports her anti-Trump agenda, and who would perhaps impose an even more outrageous sentence on me the next time around if she were able to secure my conviction with the same tactics used in my first trial.
It is time for me to move on with my life with my family, friends, and supporters. I regret not going forward with the appeal to fully expose all that happened, with the hope that by doing so, I could help prevent it from happening to anyone else ever again; but I had to decide based on what is best for me and my family. My attorneys have convinced me that the odds of victory were slim and the risk of being subjected to both an unfair appeal and perhaps an unfair second trial before the same Judge was just too great a risk.
The threshold premises behind appealing the unjust result of an unjust judicial process are 1) that the injustice was anomalous and 2) the unjust result can be ameliorated if the process can be repeated, in a 2nd chance, with the unjust elements removed or otherwise remediated, before the same tribunal. What an appeal does not and cannot remedy is an unjust result that is the product of intrinsic partisan bias and corrupt judicial bias uniquely directed at a particular defendant based on their identity, for whatever reason, unless the remedy involves a new judge in a different venue. If this does not occur, (and it very rarely does), and the defendant must simply go through the same process with the same intrinsic biases before the same distempered judge, then even the most meritorious appeal is not only an exercise in futility but also a highly-risky gambit for which the only sure thing is that I would face the same jeopardy and costs, but with the essential problems unmitigated.
The political taint that exists in the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, from the prosecutors to the judge to the jury pool, is so deep and abiding that the possibility of achieving a just result on the merits is as nonexistent as it was when this process played out the first time.
In Roger Stone’s own words: why he is withdrawing his appeal. Compelling argument. https://t.co/36pGAtsosE— Ali Alexander 🟧 (@ali) August 18, 2020
Roger Stone withdraws conviction appeal, citing 'slim' chances of success https://t.co/u35fWj236L— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) August 18, 2020
Roger Stone Drops Appeal of Conviction for Lying to Congress https://t.co/b8N0tup7W5— Jeffrey Levin (@jilevin) August 18, 2020
While you (and definitely I) were sleeping: Roger Stone dropped the appeal of his convictions for lying to Congress, obstruction, and witness tampering. Recall that Trump commuted his 40-month prison sentence, but it was not a full-out pardon: https://t.co/bA69CXx0xt pic.twitter.com/YQYiCBKDbS— Zoe Tillman (@ZoeTillman) August 18, 2020
Roger Stone gave a fiery first interview to Sean Hannity following the commutation of his sentence by President Trump. Watch below.