Judge gives prosecution in Oakhill corruption case a lesson in E - WFMJ.com News weather sports for Youngstown-Warren Ohio

Judge gives prosecution in Oakhill corruption case a lesson in English

Posted: Updated:

Attorneys prosecuting two Valley elected officials and a lawyer in the Oakhill corruption case are learning that grammar lessons don't necessarily end when you finish elementary school.

Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court Judge Janet Burnside has ordered the prosecution to correct errors in a 67 page indictment handed up against Youngstown Mayor John McNally, Mahoning County Auditor Michael Sciortino, and attorney Martin Yavorcik.

The three are accused of conspiring to cover up an alleged scheme to prevent the Mahoning County Commissioners from moving county offices out of plaza owned by a local businessman.

The prosecution originally asked the judge for permission to correct ten errors in the indictment. However, Judge Burnside returned to them a three page list of 33 errors that she discovered in the document.

The judge says the errors include clear typographical errors, apparent missing words, unintelligible sentences due to too many words, unintelligible sentences due to missing "referants" for personal pronouns, unintelligible clauses for other reasons, unidentified entities, non-parallel conjugation, duplicate paragraphs, different paragraphs carrying the same paragraph number, unintelligible allegations, and apparent misuse of gender pronouns.

The judge gave the prosecution until a week from Friday to submit the corrected indictment to the court.

The court order did not address a motion filed by two defense lawyers seeking a complete transcript of usually secret grand jury proceedings.

Attorneys for McNally and Sciortino point out that one of corrections that the prosecution wishes to make includes switching the identification of one of the law firms allegedly involved in the case.

The attorneys say they want to review with their clients, the process that led up to the indictments to clear up any discrepancies.

Otherwise, the defense says the prosecutor should have to live with the indictment as issued, or bring the evidence before a grand jury again.


Powered by Frankly
All content © Copyright 2000 - 2018 WFMJ. All Rights Reserved. For more information on this site, please read our Privacy Policy and Terms