« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Justice Department Replaces Stevens Prosecution Team
Talk about ironic.
Amid concerns over the integrity of their work, the Justice Department has removed the head of the Public Integrity Section and several other prosecutors from the Ted Stevens trial, according to court filings examined by The Politico.
Late last week, the judge in the case, Emmet Sullivan, ruled that four of the prosecutors, including William Welch, the Public Integrity chief, were in contempt of court for failing to turn over documents as he'd ordered them to do.
The documents at issue relate to allegations by an FBI agent in the case that another agent had an improper relationship with a key government witness, and that the prosecution concealed this from the defense.
Along with Welch, the lead prosecutor on the case, Brenda Morris, as well as several other prosecutors, are being ousted. They're being replaced by Paul O'Brien, chief of the Narcotic and Dangerous Drug Section, David Jaffe, the deputy chief of the Domestic Security Section, and William Stuckwisch, senior trial attorney in the Fraud Section.
Stevens the Republican former Alaska senator, was convicted last fall of failing to report gifts on his Senate disclosure form. But defense lawyers have appealed, questioning the legitimacy of those proceedings, citing, among other things, the claim of withheld evidence.
Josh
Zachary
With the titles of the new attorneys, you have to wonder if Stevens hasn't gone from the frying pan into the fire.
February 16, 2009 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't worry too much about Stevens. Why would prosecutors blatantly ignore a court order to turn over documents, risking -- and receiving -- a contempt order by refusing to produce them? Because the documents are very, very bad for the government. As in, convictions-automatically-reversed bad. We will probably be hearing shortly from the defense about how bad the documents really are and how they are going to win Steven's appeal.
February 16, 2009 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think this is why the DoJers with the big titles were brought in; to see if the conviction is reversed, is there enough for a retrial or just chuck it.
February 16, 2009 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh oh; that's big and I'd bad news for the relieved Prosecutors. I hope Judge Sullivan keeps the DoJ's feet to the fire in placing sanctions and requiring investigations over the investigation and Prosecutors Office.
February 16, 2009 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
In another country, where honesty and dignity still matters, both Stevens AND the prosecuters would be spending time in prison.
February 16, 2009 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
As I've been saying for months, Stevens is VERY dirty, but even dirty scoundrels deserve a fair trial. This dirty scoundrel didn't get one.
What is beyond belief is why the prosecutors played so fast and loose with, well... EVERYTHING. Stevens broke the law in clear and substantial ways. The prosecution didn't need to cheat, but they did.
In most of these Stevens prosecution threads, someone suggests that these Bush prosecutors have purposefully tanked the case to get Stevens off the hook. To that I say, BS!
Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence. Bush appointed one hell of a lot of incompetent people to important posts. This looks to be just another shining example of Bush league incompetence.
The reason I simply cannot believe the fix was is is because no federal prosecutor is going purposefully destroying their own legal career simply to get a unrepentant criminal like Stevens off the hook. It is Not Gonna Happen.
Further, if the fix were in, the case never would have gotten to trial. Either Stevens would never ave been prosecuted or the case would have been tanked before it reached trial.
I believe what we are seeing here is 100% incompetence, and I suspect those who perpetrated this farce will pay dearly. It's hard to overstate the terrible effect of being publicly sacked by the DOJ, with cause, will have on these lawyer's careers.
If there is any conspiracy here, it's a conspiracy to railroad a defendant who was wholly guilty. Another example Bush appointee stupidity, writ large.
February 16, 2009 6:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence."
Please. Never ascribe to incompetence that which is adequately explained by religious wingnuttery.
The Republican party is the party of God and therefore can do no wrong since everything Republicans do is God's work.
Ted Stevens is a member of the party of God and evil forces are at work trying to destroy him. Anything and everything that can be done to save Uncle Ted from the forces of evil will be rewarded in the hereafter.
Those original prosecutors were following a higher calling than any ethical earthly standards.
February 17, 2009 7:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sigh.
Cleaning house is tough work.
February 16, 2009 6:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well as a Count, is that why you have hired help?
February 16, 2009 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
In comedy, that's known as a "callback." Excellently played, Your Lordship.
February 16, 2009 11:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess that will teach DOJ to hire folks that are only acceptable to Liberty University graduates.
February 16, 2009 8:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps the DOJ'ers were working frantically to foul the case to protect the senator from jail. Ruin the case and he wins his appeal and another crooked republican stays out from behind bars.
February 16, 2009 10:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is outstanding news. The new DOJ is taking immediate action where it needs to be taken - start replacing the countless incompetent lawyers hired by ideology during the Bush administration outta there. Stevens is now dead meat, as he should have been all along.
February 17, 2009 3:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Removed from the case" is not fired. Are these guys being shown the door, relegated to the filing room, or just replaced leaving them to screw up on lesser cases?
Also, does anyone know if they are indeed Bush appointees or the picks of Bush appointees? Maybe they've been around for years and are assigned to Alaska because that's definitely the "boonies" from a DoJ point of view, and it was deemed that their lack of talent was a good fit there. Aside from the much vaunted ability to see Russia, I don't think there is much going on in Alaska to intrigue a hot-shot DoJ rising star.
Just wondering.
February 17, 2009 8:57 AM | Reply | Permalink