Judge in Ravnsborg case says no to release of evidence, requires videos to be removed.

@SoDakCampaigns

Yesterday the judge overseeing the Ravnsborg criminal charges ordered yesterday that the state can not release any information, and that they must remove any interview videos from their website:

KELOLAND News obtained court documents that will be filed in Hyde County Friday morning. They include a request from Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg’s lawyer asking a judge to stop the Governor and Department of Public Safety from releasing any more evidence in the case.

12 thoughts on “Judge in Ravnsborg case says no to release of evidence, requires videos to be removed.”

  1. Sounds like Noem overstepped by releasing all this information. Makes you wonder how much of this is one-sided and hearsay against Ravnsborg. I have been saying since day one it seems that we are only getting partial information and a partial picture of what happened.

    1. So, if Noem doesn’t release any information regarding the investigation she is accused of protecting him and South Dakota’s “good ol boy” network seeking to protect its own. If she does release it, Ravnsborg is a victim of “one sided hearsay” even though the videos contain Ravnsborg’s own words.

      It’s almost like there is literally nothing that can be done correctly in the eyes of the DWC’s commentariat.

    2. Can Ravnsborg subpoena the gov, staff and legislators emails and texts regarding his impeachment once the process begins?

      If so it could get ugly.

      I’m curious if he has subpoena powers once he is being impeached.

      1. You ever feel like you are taking crazy pills? Some of the comments on this site can sure make you feel that way.

  2. 8:33 exactly. Can’t do nothin right. Hearsay is not a video of a man speaking his own words.

  3. …hearsay is telling people about how he lied on the videos but not actually releasing those to be seen. This is literally the exact opposite of hearsay.

    1. There is not one shred of evidence that Ransvorg lied on the videos, I have watched the videos fully. Have you??? He breaks down and gets teary-eyed during it, that doesn’t look like someone who lies. And why would he agree to the questioning anyways if he had something to hide.

      Those investigated use these tactics all time to go after people. they lie and they stretch the truth to try and uncover the trueth. Until we see the investigation I don’t trust much of anything that is coming out.

      1. Listen man one of the following two things must be true:

        1) Jason was distracted by his phone when the impact occurred, and he’s dishonestly saying he wasn’t, or

        2) Jason was not distracted by his phone when the impact occurred, and he’s dishonestly saying he thought it was a deer and didn’t see the victim’s head come through his windshield.

        Either way, he’s lying — which is obvious if you watch the interviews — and only the most oblivious supporter would deny this.

  4. Larry:

    He’s lying because when initially interviewed he said he wasn’t on his phone other than to check the time. But forensics proved he was on his phone repeatedly and near the time of the crash. Checking the time and checking emails are not the same thing. That is why we all know he lied. Please explain how this is not lying.

  5. Over the series of posts on SD War College which pertain to Ravnsborg and the fatal motor vehicle incident, it has been very easy to identify those replies/comments which are courtesy of Jason’s out-of-state PR and crisis management firm.

Comments are closed.