Norman Hsu Fails to Appear for Court, Warrant Issued

Norman Hsu was a no-show at his court hearing to reduce bail today. Instead of reducing bail, the Judge revoked it and said he would be held without bail if apprehended.

His lawyer, James Brosnahan, didn't have a ready excuse:

``Mr. Hsu is not here and we do not know where Mr. Hsu is,'' Brosnahan said outside court. Brosnahan said that ``there was some contact'' with Hsu a few hours before the scheduled 9 a.m. court appearance, but he declined to say how and who talked to Hsu.

Hsu also failed to comply with the Court's order to turn his passport over to his counsel for delivery to the Court.

< Another Data-Mining Program Bites the Dust | Matt Stoller Guest Post: The Bush Dog Democrat Campaign >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Clinton and scandal? (1.00 / 2) (#6)
    by beefeater on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 03:32:37 PM EST
    Anybody check Fort Marcy park?

    Presidential pardons (1.00 / 0) (#24)
    by diogenes on Thu Sep 06, 2007 at 10:08:12 PM EST
    If they only applied to federal crimes, then someone could have indicted Nixon for violating a state law, no?  Or Weinberger, maybe?  No one even trolled for state indictments on those folks, making me think that the pardon is blanket.
    In fact, though, he likely is dead.  Lord Voldemort treats his followers as badly as he treats his enemies.

    I've got serious problems (none / 0) (#1)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 02:38:41 PM EST
    being surprised by this development.  

    Of course, if a minor functionary at DHS can track Glenn Greenwald when he went away on vacation last year, then blog about it on a conservative blog, I'm sure Mr. Hsu's passport will instantly pop up when he tries to skip.

    Not if.  When.  

    Assuming, of course, the Rethugs in government want to find Hsu, as opposed to letting that little thorn in the Dems' foot get infected.

    Historicity (none / 0) (#16)
    by manys on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 06:09:51 PM EST
    He's no Kenneth Lay, that's for sure.

    Why the heavy lawyer? (none / 0) (#2)
    by Gabriel Malor on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 03:15:08 PM EST
    Why go to all the trouble to retain Brosnahan if he just planned to skip town?

    This makes me think he didn't initially plan to flee; something else may have come up.

    Forfeiting a $2Mil bond (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 03:27:43 PM EST
    for not showing up is reason enough to put off whatever else might be competing for your time.

    I'd think most people would accept the excuse that "I have an appointment I absolutely cannot miss...."

    Or so it seems to me.


    $2 million (none / 0) (#7)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 03:36:37 PM EST

    is small change for the Chinese government.

    Eh? (none / 0) (#8)
    by Gabriel Malor on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 04:03:14 PM EST
    scribe, I wasn't suggesting that he had a prior engagement. I'm suggesting that he believes he may be in more trouble than just bouncing on the earlier  conviction.

    And obviously, the $2 million wasn't enough reason to get Hsu to show up in court.


    my point in calling it an appointment was (none / 0) (#9)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 04:11:10 PM EST
    that if you are going to beg off something else because you're in criminal trouble and have to go to court, maybe you don't want to be telling the person hearing you "I can't be there because I have to face criminal charges in court."

    In other words, a little social nicety.

    I think he had more than 2 million reasons not to be there and only 2 million to be there.  

    But, I'm just speculatin' from the outside.


    My (none / 0) (#3)
    by Wile ECoyote on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 03:24:51 PM EST
    money is with a long vacation in the special province of Macao.

    doesn't he.

    Perhaps (none / 0) (#10)
    by Deconstructionist on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 04:20:48 PM EST
      his recollection was refreshed as to what he was facing in California. Maybe his lawyer explained to him that no he couldn't buy his way out of the previously imposed sentence and was likely to go to prison even if he made restitution and he decided that was not something he wanted to do.


    Perhaps he knows the previous Ponzi scheme (none / 0) (#11)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 04:38:49 PM EST
    he was convicted of is just the tip of the iceberg...

    Maybe (none / 0) (#12)
    by Deconstructionist on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 04:48:23 PM EST
      but even if not, he is in serious trouble and people have been known to flee for just one felony conviction and the prospect of one sentence.

    his Ponzi scheme conviction and his donation bundling activities are just too close for me to ignore...

    If he had been going to flee, (none / 0) (#14)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 06:04:31 PM EST
    why didn't he do so before the $2M?

    Something very serious has happened since then.

    Perhaps he sleeps with the fishes..

    Who knows. I once prosecuted a serial (none / 0) (#15)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 06:08:40 PM EST
    first degree burglar. He showed up for the morning court session, but not the afternoon session. Mom had mortgaged her home to post bail.

    The Pardon (none / 0) (#17)
    by diogenes on Wed Sep 05, 2007 at 10:12:51 PM EST
    Can you say "The fugitive financier Marc Rich"?
    And a Clinton pardoned him in the end.  He knows dirt that people don't want him to say, whether he was allowed to escape or sleeps with the fishes.

    This is a big stretch. I've (none / 0) (#18)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 06, 2007 at 12:13:55 AM EST
    never even heard rumors that Bill Clinton pardoned Rich because Rich had something on Clinton.  Libby/Bush now is another matter.

    True (1.00 / 0) (#22)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Sep 06, 2007 at 04:03:26 PM EST
    It was just money from Rich..

    Of course you did have all Chinese money

    Is that a rocket in your pocket or do you just want to shoot down satellites??


    your right oculus (none / 0) (#20)
    by Slado on Thu Sep 06, 2007 at 07:37:26 AM EST
    It's probably a stretch.

    The motives like in the case of this guy are quite simple.  Money.

    Give the Clintons lot's of money and you get favors.   Plain and simple.


    All he has to do... (none / 0) (#19)
    by Slado on Thu Sep 06, 2007 at 07:36:23 AM EST
    is hide out for 5 or 9 years and then Hillary can give him a pardon if she wins the presidency.

    It's a state offense (none / 0) (#21)
    by Deconstructionist on Thu Sep 06, 2007 at 07:40:36 AM EST
      Presidents can only grant clemency with respect to federal offenses.

    He be dead. (none / 0) (#23)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Sep 06, 2007 at 04:04:23 PM EST
    If a prosecutor (none / 0) (#25)
    by Deconstructionist on Fri Sep 07, 2007 at 07:05:01 AM EST
    could persuade a state grand jury that someone whoe has received a Presidential pardon has violated A STATE law then, yes the person could be indicted (ans subsequently convicted and sentenced) by a state, even if the state law violation occurred during the sane course of conduct which was subject of the the Presidential pardon. It's obviously not likely to occur for a number of reasons but the power to establish and enforce state laws is reserved to the states and under  our system of ferderalism the federal government may not usurp that power -- and that includes the President issuing clemency.