Possibly
But I think that would lend more credence to the delay scenario and be highly unlikely. If Madan Mohan and Dr Julie want to change their plea, the quicker the better now after Davila accepted and recorded the guilty plea. Then, whatever arrangement they made with the DOJ will be dissolved and they don't have to testify at the Schena trial, and can go to trial themselves and face the charges. Given the delay statement below, I don't believe Davilia will accept the change of plea after the Schena trial.
But again, this is IMHO. I'm sure most people on this board now will be around and Feb 2022 to see how this all plays. I'm in the belief that both Dr Julie and Mohan were faced with overwhelming evidence and took the advice of their council to plead guilty. The strongest evidence out there in a trial is direct testimony so I think Dr Schena has a large up hill battle given two people will take the stand against him. Could he be found not guilty...sure. Could the judge reverse two guilty pleas after the trial? I guess it's possible. But given all of the information about how the system is set up now that they have admitted their guilt it's very unlikely.
But I'm entertaining the possibility and so should everyone else. If it does turn out they are able to change their pleas after the trial, I guess I'll be the one up here saying how the SEC and DOJ and courts are a joke, the trial was filled with errors and there are greater forces working than we all know... ha ha ha.
Delaying such a motion until after the trial or sentencing of co-defendants could provide the defendant with the opportunity to preview the government's evidence and trial strategy, as well as to discover the potential punishments. If a defendant has enjoyed such benefits through delay, courts examine such motions with a much more discriminating eye. Thus, delay in bringing a motion to withdraw a guilty plea only serves to impose a greater burden on the defendant to convince the court to grant relief
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
