Judge calls sealed indictment procedure into question

Although a closed court hearing involving the sealed indictment of a Las Vegas businessman resulted in a "ruling in part" on Wednesday, according to District Judge Donald Mosley, the case remains secret today.

Attorneys in the case have refused to comment, citing Mosley's confidentiality order, but there are indications the indictment no longer is hovering over the businessman and three others.

After the end of the hour and a half closed-door court hearing on a challenge to the sealed indictment, Mosley commented that there would be "no future hearings" and each side in the case now has "several options."

The challenges, Mosley admitted, were over "the indictment procedure" rather than the substance of the criminal charges alleged in the indictment.

That could indicate the issue involved the presentation of evidence to the grand jury and, perhaps, the failure of prosecutors to present evidence which would have favored the defendants, as required by law.

The remedy in such cases is for prosecutors to take the case back to a grand jury and seek a new indictment after presenting all the relevant and required evidence.

That conclusion is bolstered by the revelation that court motions were filed before the grand jury had deliberated and issued the indictment.

While citing the order sealing evidence in the case as a basis for not divulging his actual ruling or the details of the grand jury case presented by the attorney general's office, Mosley said it could be a precedent setting case.

He conceded that he is just a District Court judge and any lasting precedent setting value would have to come from a Nevada Supreme Court decision.

That could result from an appeal of Wednesday's secret rulings to the high court -- if that is the "option" chosen.

While Mosley cited the sealing of the case as the reason he can't reveal the outcome, he commented, "Frankly, I don't see anything earth shattering about this case.

"My offhand view is that I'm not sure I care about it that much," he said. "It's not like it's some juicy item or something."

But he said the sealing "is in keeping with the reason behind the law" to protect the identities of the defendants, although he said he would consider a motion to unseal the case.

archive