That was what the argument was about. The Feds denied that; Biden's lawyers said it did.
From today's hearing ......
"THE COURT: Now, we have two cases and two agreements and
I
understand that the Diversion Agreement is not something that is typically before
the Court, but you all did send it to me so I do want to talk about that a little bit. There are some provisions in those agreements that are not standard and are
different from what I normally see, so I think we need to walk through these
documents and get some understanding of what is being proposed so that I can
give due consideration to the determination that you all are asking me to make."
THE COURT: All right. Now, I want to talk a little bit about this
agreement not to prosecute.
The agreement not to prosecute includes -- is in the
gun case, but it also includes crimes related to the tax case. So we looked through
a bunch of diversion agreements that we have access to and we couldn't find
anything that had anything similar to that.So let me first ask, do you have any precedent for agreeing not to
prosecute crimes that have nothing to do with the case or the charges being
diverted?
MR. WISE: I'm not aware of any, Your Honor.THE COURT: Do you have any authority that says that that's appropriate
and that the probation officer should agree to that as terms, or the chief of
probation should agree to that as terms of a Diversion Agreement?"
https://t.co/OZT0M1rWoMWhy did they send the diversion agreement to the judge if it is not something that appears before the Court ?
But because the judge did review it, questions were asked. If the judge had not reviewed it, is it safe to assume there may have been a no prosecution agreement on the tax charges if the Court accepted the tax charge agreement ?
The prosecution is requesting the move to dismiss by the defense be denied because the agreement was not approved by the probation office.
Does a plea deal generally go to the judge prior to the probation office ?
Why was the diversion agreement sent to the judge ?