Comments on: Federal Judge Challenges Justice Department Over Another Case of Withholding Evidence and False Statements

By: Mike Appleton

Mike Appleton — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:59:57 +0000

I anticipate that before this is over, Mr. O’Brien will receive his own education.

By: Mike Spindell

Mike Spindell — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:12:17 +0000

The question with the DOJ is how does one change a culture that has existed for many, many years? We know for instance that JE Hoover ran roughshod over civil liberties by the FBI and yet his death left the culture remaining in place and was followed 2 decades later when the famed FBI Lab was found to be falsifying evidence. Even Bobby Kennedy, who I greatly admired, allowed abuse of the law to take place. It is no surprise that
Federal Prosecutors have ignored the law since I assume that prosecutors all over the country do the same. That is why a conviction record is considered so important.

By: Jim Byrne

Jim Byrne — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 15:46:42 +0000

I can’t begin to describe the amount of anger stirred-up by stories of prosecutorial misconduct.

If one “cheats” in order to win, the penalty for cheating must be equal to that suffered by their victim(s).

If one is deprived of their liberty for 10 years, as a result of prosecutorial misconduct; that prosecutor should serve 10 years.

The prosecutor represents the government. Permitting prosecutorial misconduct to continue, virtually unchecked, and with little-to-no penalty, violates the foundation of our legal system. It is tyrannical rule. It eliminates the role of the jury and the jurist.

“There is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under cover of law, and with the colors of justice …” – U.S. v. Jannotti, 673 F.2d 578, 614 (3d Cir. 1982)

Bring these tyrants to me. Let me, as one man, pass judgment and impose penalty; just as they have done by abusing their power. Of this you can be sure; their conduct will not be repeated, and no others will have a desire to follow in their footsteps. Yes; I would gladly defecate in the mouth of the liar.

By: Anonymously Yours

Anonymously Yours — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 03:38:42 +0000

Gary T 1, July 2, 2009 at 11:36 pm

******************************

Amen Brother.

By: Gary T

Gary T — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 03:36:01 +0000

It is bad enough the DOJ does this regularly; and open secret that almost every defense attorney knows about. DOJ attorneys run slipshod over all FRCrP, court rules, Brady requirements, withholding documents until right before trial, lying about pretrial codefendant testimony, and just about every crooked thing in the book, as long as they can claim plausible deniability after they do it.
The biggest problem is failure of the courts’ supervisory powers over such prosecutors; judges treat intentionally errant government lawyers like unruly varsity jocks – “Well you know how kids are, boys will be boys”, and then at most slap them on the wrists.
Coerced guilty pleas or illegal trial convictions, based upon or substantively caused by prosecutorial misconduct are rarely overturned on post-conviction remedy. There simply is no commensurate accountability for the offending prosecutors.
Judges don’t treat these court-procedure crimes for the very serious infractions they are, people’s lives are on the line, the smallest violation of court due process causes civil rights to be violated, might force guilty pleas, denial of right to trial, skewed trials, ruin reputations, extended incarceration before trial, violation of speedy trial rights, the list goes on.
There is very little incentive not to break the rules, as no serious punishment is in down the pike for them, and the payoff for successful convictions way well swamp the risk of mild rebuke.
When was the last time a government prosecutor lost his law license for violating court-procedure rule, or other prosecutorial obligation? I just don’t think it happens.
The courts’ approach after the fact is let bygones be bygones.

By: lottakatz

lottakatz — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 01:53:47 +0000

Every time I read one of these stories I just have one comment/question: Why is Don Siegelman still a convicted felon and why is Paul Minor still in jail?

I also write and ask the Justice Department in longer form of course. They don’t respond. I suppose they don’t have to since Holder has already said that he has no plans to look into the case.

I’m assuming that’s because once the Rove link is established we stop looking forward and have to actually do something about the criminal enterprise known as the Bush Presidency. Bah Humbug.

mailto:AskDOJ@usdoj.gov?subject=USDOJ%20Comments

By: rafflaw

rafflaw — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 23:44:07 +0000

I don’t get it. How can the Justice department say it didn’t violate the requirement to turn over possibly exculpatory evidence, and at the same time ask for a dismissal? Are these the same attorneys of record that have been on the case all along? Is Holder forcing these guys to eat crow in court after reviewing their shoddy work? That is merely a guess on my part, because I can’t understand how these attorneys can be so reckless.

By: Dredd

Dredd — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:56:05 +0000

The era of the A-Word is emerging …

http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/07/when-accountability-is-plague.html

By: Buddha Is Laughing

Buddha Is Laughing — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:27:23 +0000

rofl

Is being able to fit both your feet in your mouth at the same time a prerequisite for working at DOJ now? I can’t wait until that nitwit Paul O’Brien realizes the full cost his offices will now pay in increased challenges and scrutiny from Judge Sullivan.

Get ‘em, Judge!

By: Anonymously Yours

Anonymously Yours — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:32:33 +0000

Text of Articel:

“The judge suggested the prosecution’s conduct may not have comported with the U.S. attorneys manual and with Attorney General Eric Holder Jr.’s oft-repeated statement that the job of the prosecutor is not to win cases but to do justice.”

Not any Prosecutor I ever knew. Maybe in theory it sounds good. But in practice? Come on, I would bet more than 60 percent of all the cases that go to trial are tainted with the error of non disclosure. Generally the courts uphold the convictions as an error on the part of the defense and/or harmless error. They do play in fact the 13, 14, and 15 Juror most of the time, to convict.

This is BS.

Basic Science don’t you know, as I say it smiling.