Camblos’ Charges Against Wyatt Tossed Out

A judge has thrown out Jim Camblos’ bullshit charges against political opponent Debbie Wyatt, WINA reports on their unlinkable website. The charges were filed the night before the election, accusing Wyatt of violating a common-law charge contained within the Magna Carta. The thing stank to high heaven as a last-minute revenge ploy against Wyatt, and Judge William Ledbetter agreed, declaring that it “would be an injustice” to proceed with the case. Of course, Camblos will remain in office through the end of the year, so he’s still got time for more shenanigans. 10:35pm Update: Rob Seal’s got the story at the Progress.

19 thoughts on “Camblos’ Charges Against Wyatt Tossed Out”

  1. Look, I’m on record here as supporting D. Lunsford in the election, but isn’t this latest blast against Camblos a bit much? As I recall, the charges against Wyatt were filed by a special prosecutor, no?

  2. From the DP story about the charges:

    “Albemarle Commonwealth’s Attorney Jim Camblos initiated the unusual case by referring it to a special prosecutor for investigation.”

    and, the story quotes Camblos as saying,

    “‘I just felt there was something that ought to be looked at. I went to [Circuit] Judge [Edward L.] Hogshire and asked for a special prosecutor to be appointed. I got a special prosecutor appointed and they took it to the grand jury.'”

    Draw your own conclusion about who was the motor behind the charges.

  3. Not exactly accurate, Falstaff. Camblos sought out a special “friendly” prosecutor for a bullshit charge for no other reason than to be the vindictive ass that he is. While it’s true that the special prosecutor, Nagin’s his name, sought the indictment, it was no doubt at the behest of Camblos. The judge ruled that AS A MATTER OF LAW what Debbie did was not a crime. Any prosecutor worth a damn would have known that.

  4. Yeah, what does it tell ya that in less than 10 days, the bullshit 5 count indictment against Debbie is unsealed (last Monday before election day) and are dismissed (today). What’s that say about the strength of those charges? Camblos got what was coming to him — and would have happened earlier if he hadn’t been UNOPPOSED for the past 15 years — a TROUNCING at the polls by a well-informed Albemarle County community.

  5. unwanted red headed stepchild?

    Well I’m shocked to find ginger haters here at cvillenews!

  6. Just curious, if one were to infer by comments here that the opinion of some is that Camblos and Nagin are not worth a damn, would a judge appointing a special prosecutor in this case still be worth a damn? How about a grand jury that indicts Ms. Wyatt on such charges? Is it worth a damn? Camblos might have been the engine behind the charges, but there were others along the way who kept the motor running. I’m like most people on this site; Albemarle is better off with a new lead prosecutor. But come on people, Camblos and Nagin weren’t the only ones involved here. Spread the blame evenly.

  7. Baron, that would be UNLINKABLE.

    I kind of like it — the unlinkable WINA. Kind of like the unsinkable Molly Brown, or whatever that was…

  8. Just curious, if one were to infer by comments here that the opinion of some is that Camblos and Nagin are not worth a damn, would a judge appointing a special prosecutor in this case still be worth a damn?

    I don’t know much about the legal system, so take this with a handful of salt. I speculate that a judge may come under some social and professional pressure to appoint a special prosector when there are charges, no matter how bizarre, brought by the commonwealth’s attorney against a practicing criminal attorney. The judge doesn’t want to be accused of participating in a cover-up.

    I’m reminded of when Mitch Van Yahres was accused of illegally fundraising during the session because a PAC that he had nothing to do with held an event in the middle of January. A special prosecutor had to be appointed. What with Van Yahres not being registered as having anything to do with the PAC nor having ever received anything from the PAC, one would think that the judge could have quite easily have told the complainant to get stuffed. But, again, to avoid the appearance of impropriety, the time was taken to find a special prosecutor.

  9. Looks like I called this one well.

    quote by Demopublican
    Nov 6th, 2007 at 10:05 pm
    “Jeeperman, what in the world are you talking about? These foolish charges against Debbie Wyatt will be dismissed before they even go to trial.”

    I wonder what recourse Debbie Wyatt will or can have against Jim Camblos now? These were false arrests. Judge Ledbetter said Wyatt’s actions did not amount to embracery. I’m wondering if she will sue Jim Camblos for malicious prosecution. Perhaps defamation of character as well.

  10. I don’t think it’s a matter of political or social pressure on the part of the judge in appointing a special prosecutor, Waldo. Although I don’t know off-hand, I don’t think there’s any discretion on the part of a judge to appoint once the request is made by the regular prosecutor. All the prosecutor needs to do is express some conflict and the appointment is made, since the judge can’t make prosecutorial decisions.

    And given the further facts of this case, we should all know by now that a grand jury is a rubber-stamping tool of the prosecution, although it’s not supposed to be. It merely looks at the prosecution’s evidence, not anything else.

  11. it’s said that a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich. so, an indictment doesn’t mean all that much. the commonwealth has to meet a low standard of probable cause, but does a grand jury even know what that means? most people assume that if a prosecutor brought the charge, the person must be guilty.

Comments are closed.