Possible Mistrial in Sen. Stevens’ Corruption Trial

Senator Ted Stevens may get a mistrial after the judge discovered that prosecutors withheld material evidence from his defense. It is a great irony for the Republican Senator who, like Sen. Larry Craig, spent careers stripping criminal defendants of rights, but soon found the value of those hated little “technicalities.”

The fact is that the alleged abuse by the prosecutors should result in a new trial and U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan is the type of judge who would order it. I have been in front of Judge Sullivan for years and he is someone who will not take constitutional violations lightly.

The violation deals with FBI reports about the prosecution’s star witness, Bill Allen, which were not turned over until Wednesday night. These are core and material reports for the defense.

Judge Sullivan was clearly irate at the initial hearing, stating: “This is not about prosecution by any means necessary. It’s not about hiding the ball. … Why shouldn’t I dismiss this indictment? I find it unbelievable that this was just an error.” He previously warned prosecutors about their handling of the case.

For the full story, click here

11 thoughts on “Possible Mistrial in Sen. Stevens’ Corruption Trial”

  1. Ted Steves was described as someone who goes ballastic if he has to pay a bill, out of his own money.
    What an irony, this guy has put more 100’s and 100’s of billions on the backs of future generations. Further, it was noted that he had a defense consisting of 12 at his court table. Of course, the legal White collar Star, Brendan Sullivan, and support attorneys, and other supporting defense assistants, perhaps costing as much as
    $ 200,000 per week. Now, in the first day of deliberations, the jury is too stressed out, and wants to go home.
    The great appropriator–Ted Stevens– if he gets off, it will show
    he can thumb his nose, have contempt for accountability, he can play by a set of rules, of his own making, he gamed the system.
    He can take billions of others people’s money, and pass it around to others. Is that something to make him the big Kahuna of Socialists…? A really big S word, major S..!
    The guy is a piece of trash, even if he beats the rap..
    Brendan Sullivan, and Williams and Connelly are big high powered for the powerful, the connected, and the kind of defense Stevens got was way beyond the Godfather of all Mafia Kings.
    But, he paid for it… Right, and who will now pay the piper in the aftermath, when Stevens goes back to being the HULK, if he slides, and the jury buys the bad bill thing.
    No wonder America has a $ 10 trillion national debt, it elects people like Stevens, but hey, it was all on the up and up, wasn’t it ?

  2. A cynic might surmise that the prosecutors are trying to throw the case in order to save a GOP Senate seat. Maybe they were ordered to take a dive in a middle round. At the very least, they are shaving points so that they do not win by too big a margin.

  3. How could seasoned lawyers unintentionally …..

    Ah, there’s the rub. I recall a line from Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged that went something like: “There are no coincidences. If you think one exists, check your premises.”

    So, suddenly the Steven’s case goes south in the same neighborhood where the Governor’s husband is defying a lawful subpeona in the Governor’s abuse of authority investigation which the Alaska GOP and the McCain campaign are actively trying to kill. If these things were happening in a state with more than 38 people in it, I’d say they might be unrelated conincidences, but we’re learning a lot these days about Alaska governance.

  4. Even though I agree with Gino that the fix is in, my reason is 180 degrees from his wild claim that Pelosi and Reed have some control over the Bush Justice Department!

  5. I am inclined to agree with Gino that this may have been an intentional attempt to give Steven’s an “out” in his corruption trial. With what we know of the politicization in the Bush Justice Department, I would not be surprised.

  6. The fix is in. The evil Pelosi/Reed cabal paid the prosecutors to bury the evidence so that there would be one less Republican Senator in Congress when we coronate Lord Barack. They’re working their way to a veto proof majority before they strip us of all of our rights. The right to keep the fruits of our labor, the right to keep and bear arms …

    Ah, forget it. I wanted to see if I could sound like some of you guys, but the other way around. I just don’t have it in me.

  7. I was ‘chomping at the bit’ wondering how I could suggest the coverage of this story on this forum. To the extent possible, I request that the attorneys/lawyers give us their ‘nonbinding’ legal opinions regarding this case.

    How could seasoned lawyers unintentionally make such a parochial legal mistake? Surely it was not ‘intentional’ because what legal advantage would there be for such maneuvering other than to disingenuously damage the prosecution’s case?

    Coincidentally, can the same lawyers explain if/when such legal opinions might breach established or accepted legal codes of ethics? I have always wondered about that possibility.

Comments are closed.