« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Stevens Judge Weighing Sanctions Against Prosecutors
The charges against Ted Stevens may be about to be dropped -- but the fallout isn't over.
The judge in the case yesterday ordered the Justice Department to hand over documents relating to allegations of prosecutorial misconduct in the case, reports the Washington Post.
It was because of this misconduct that Attorney General Eric Holder last week decided to ask the judge, Emmet Sullivan, drop the charges against Stevens.
Though Sullivan is expected to grant the government's motion tomorrow, he still wants the documents because he must decide whether to impose sanctions on the prosecutors -- a fine, or even jail time -- if he concludes they intentionally violated evidentiary rules, explains the Post.
The trial and its aftermath saw a series of complaints about prosecutorial missteps, many of which centered on the failure of government lawyers to promptly turn over key evidence to the defense. In February, Sullivan held prosecutors in contempt after they did not immediately hand over to him documents relating to an FBI whistleblower's allegations of prosecutorial misconduct. Shortly afterward, the Justice Department replaced the team of four prosecutors, including William Welch, the head of the department's Public Integrity section. And Holder's decision to ask that the charges be dropped followed the discovery that prosecutors had not turned over evidence suggesting that a crucial government witness had contradicted himself about whether Stevens expected to be billed for the renovations to his home that were at the heart of the case.
Sanctions for department prosecutors would be a major black eye for Justice, just when it's looking to move beyond the problems of the Bush years.
| TOPICS: Alaska, Eric Holder, FBI, Justice Department, Ted Stevens
Josh
Zachary
It's a bad sign when a judge finds a prosecutor in contempt.
April 6, 2009 9:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is only bad for that prosecutor and for the system that allowed that prosecutor to be in a position in which he was responsible for any prosecution.
It's actually a good sign for the "Rule of Law" when a judge finds a willfully incompetent prosecutor in contempt.
.
April 6, 2009 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Although I'm a committed liberal, a follower of the Steven trial, and believe Stevens is guilty, the obvious prosecutorial misconduct (by long time career prosecutors who have served both Democratic and Republican administrations)once again, in my view, point out a basic problem in our system of justice: a prosecutorial belief that, at worse, they are framing a guilty man. It has been shown many times in The Innocence Project of Barry Scheck & company, by the acts of the prosecutors and investigators, who truly believe the accused is guilty and they only need to find a way to prove it, in many cases by altering or concealing evidence which is at odds with their theories. I have seen examples of this in many state prosecutions; I'm disturbed that this culture now has surfaced at the federal level.
April 6, 2009 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
After the last three AG's (Whose pictures should be removed from the walls of the Department of Justice and their empty spaces painted Black), Holder is a great return to justice and competence in the DoJ.
April 6, 2009 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Have all the Bush US Attorneys been fired yet?
April 6, 2009 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
No and they couldn't be. There are U.S. Attorneys and Assistant U.S. Attorneys. U.S. Attorneys can be fired but Assistant U.S. Attorneys can't be summarily fired because they have protection as government employees. The attorneys involved in the Stevens shenanigans were Assistant U.S. Attorneys and although they can be fired for poor performance, etc, they have rights to hearings to present their side of the case. With regard to U.S. Attorneys, the people who head the various offices, some of them (Fitzgerals for one) are highly competent and principled and Holdger will not be attempting to fire. Although they are political appointees for purposes of hiring and firing, many of them were and are good attorneys
April 6, 2009 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great - so fire those who were involved in the Ted Stevens case and let them defend why they were so incompetent as to fail to inform the defense of evidence they planned to use in the trial.
That is very basic to any prosecutions case.
April 7, 2009 8:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Sanctions for department prosecutors would be a major black eye for Justice, just when it's looking to move beyond the problems of the Bush years."
I'm not sure I understand this statement. These guys were Bushies who had been approved by Monica Goodling were they not, not anyone whom the present administration is associated with? This IS a Bush years problem.
I see two beneficial results of this whole business, especially if the prosecutors get jailed. The first and probably most important is that it sets a precedent for clamping down on prosecutorial misbehavior and brings it into the light so that it can no longer be hidden and ignored. Here in Texas this type of behavior is so rampant that it is difficult to believe anything a DA says. There are several prominent examples of prosecutors being caught lying (Thalia, Dallas), but as far as I know, none have ever been sanctioned in any meaningful way.
The second benefit is that people can associate the Bush mindset with another example of abuse of power.
April 6, 2009 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
How can the charges be dropped after someone has been convicted? Does that mean the conviction is reversed 'ad hoc'? Isn't justice served by having the appeals court rule on Steven's motions, and if the court finds sufficient problems with the prosecution then it might overturn the conviction and send the case back for further disposition?
What is Holder covering up here by short-circuiting the justice process?
April 6, 2009 2:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would hope corruption charges could be brought foreward for these attorneys. Although I still believe a fair trial would have convicted Stevens, the fact that the Government can possibly illegally put one in prison is much more dangerous than a crook getting off even when guilty, because it affects a democracy at the root level and a semblence of equal and honest justice is necessary for a nation to remain free.
However, these past few generations have shown us that more and more, our public servants and elected officials are very capable of paying no attention to laws and statutes... without penalty. We are just now reaping the consequences of this. As long as consequences are minimum or nonexistent, those in power will just become less and less responsive to us commoners.
Therefore, I hope some severe criminal penalties are brought about... for these and other scoundrels who believe they can do anything without paying penalties...
April 6, 2009 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
One might ask why, if the prosecutors were so experienced, they blundered so badly as to lose the case. More so given the "justice" system is clearly geared towards the act of prosecution (that's why the system exists). It follows that enormous stupidity on the part of a prosecutor is required to lose. Either this or a defense willing to burn bridges and risk their professions by bringing every crooked prosecution move to light (as in the first Simpson case).
There is one other angle: losing on purpose.
At a distance, I wondered if these prosecutors were either grossly incompetent (entirely possible given their sponsors) or intentionally blowing the case.
Would not the latter be cause for even more righteous anger from a Judge?
Theory: Going after Stevens, as he's clearly a crook, quells the public anger. All the while it's just another Bush maladministration P-R game. Can't drop the charges - that would be too obvious - but there are other ways to keep one of the Brethren out of the slammer, all while collecting the weekly paycheck and building that resume.
April 6, 2009 10:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Stevens camp will be selling this as a repudiation of his guilty verdict, his will also be the meme of the MSM.
But the smoking gun is the Senate forms he filled out, you know, the forms with all those empty lines on them.
April 7, 2009 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was told by a reliable source that Stevens warned his fellow senators and congressmen that if they allowed this conviction to stand there would be hell to pay. Stevens warned everyone that no one would be spared if he was NOT made whole and stayed whole!: Imagine the secrets this feisty veteran senator holds...
I have never seen anything like this in my lifetime.
April 7, 2009 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink