Gawain 0 #1 April 1, 2009 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090401/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/stevens_justice QuoteThe trial was beset by government missteps, culminating recently when a federal judge took the unusual step of holding the Justice Department in contempt. In early morning court filings, the Justice Department admitted it never turned over notes from an interview with the oil contractor, who estimated the value of the renovation work as far less than he testified at trial. Of course that makes everything okay now...So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 426 #2 April 1, 2009 Quote http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090401/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/stevens_justice Quote The trial was beset by government missteps, culminating recently when a federal judge took the unusual step of holding the Justice Department in contempt. In early morning court filings, the Justice Department admitted it never turned over notes from an interview with the oil contractor, who estimated the value of the renovation work as far less than he testified at trial. Of course that makes everything okay now... Stevens said the whole time that he would be found not guilty. Guess he was right.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #3 April 1, 2009 I think that Stevens is a dirty SOB. On the other hand; prosecutors are at the top of my legal shit list for things like this. It seems the prosecutors did not think that they could prove their case without resorting to dirty tactics that amounted to contempt. This is why I appreciate criminal defense attorneys who are there to ensure that the prosecution does its job in a Constitutional manner. Here, the prosecution violated a defendant's rights in a zest for a conviction. That's not justice. I'd rather see a guilty man go free than an innocent man go in. And believe me - stories like this and the Duke lacrosse scandal are shockingly common.. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,534 #4 April 1, 2009 What he said. Thanks for saying it better and more knowledgeably. Same thing for OJ. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #5 April 1, 2009 Quote Stevens said the whole time that he would be found not guilty. Guess he was right. That's not what happened. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Krip 2 #6 April 1, 2009 Not to worrySteven's lawyer still got paidIf the feds still want the disgraced senator The senator and his family still got some other skeletons in the closet. One Jump Wonder Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 426 #7 April 1, 2009 Quote Quote Stevens said the whole time that he would be found not guilty. Guess he was right. That's not what happened. Oh that's right. He said he wasn't guilty.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Capt.Slog 0 #8 April 1, 2009 Good job he didn't get to spend 20+ years on death row as a result of over zealous prosecutors, like some innocent people have. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #9 April 1, 2009 Quote In early morning court filings, the Justice Department admitted it never turned over notes from an interview with the oil contractor, who estimated the value of the renovation work as far less than he testified at trial. So he provided two different numbers, and the problem was in going with the one he provided under oath? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #10 April 1, 2009 QuoteSo he provided two different numbers, and the problem was in going with the one he provided under oath It's a bit more complicated than that, Dave. Here's the motion to set aside verdict and for dismissal of indictment. http://media.npr.org/documents/2009/apr/doj_stevens.pdf This case has turned into a cluster fuck for the govt. The first full paragraph on p. 2 describes in a nutshell what happened. Stevens was prevented from a fair trial. And the proseutorial misconduct continued in opposing the motion for a new trial. Hence, the sanctions against the prosecutors. I reckon more irregularities have been found that have not yet come to the attention of the defense counsel. It appears that the DOJ came to the conclusion that it either could not win this case or that additional troubles would be exposed. By no means is Steven vindicated in my mind. But at least the rule of law ultimately prevailed. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #11 April 1, 2009 Quote By no means is Steven vindicated in my mind. But at least the rule of law ultimately prevailed. would prevail further if the prosecution team suffered for their misconduct. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #12 April 2, 2009 QuoteQuote By no means is Steven vindicated in my mind. But at least the rule of law ultimately prevailed. would prevail further if the prosecution team suffered for their misconduct. There's always the possibility they might be brought up on disciplinary charges if their misconduct was willful and egregious enough. Remember, the prosecutor who fucked-over the Duke athletes was eventually disbarred for it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryzflies 0 #13 April 2, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote By no means is Steven vindicated in my mind. But at least the rule of law ultimately prevailed. would prevail further if the prosecution team suffered for their misconduct. There's always the possibility they might be brought up on disciplinary charges if their misconduct was willful and egregious enough. Remember, the prosecutor who fucked-over the Duke athletes was eventually disbarred for it. How often does something like that happen? Only in high profile cases, I bet.If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #14 April 2, 2009 Haven't followed the case nor do I have the practical legal experience you do, nonetheless, strongly concur here: QuoteThat's not justice. I'd rather see a guilty man go free than an innocent man go in. QuoteBy no means is Steven vindicated in my mind. But at least the rule of law ultimately prevailed. Cedit to AG Holder for making an unpopular decision in some folks minds that was -- as I understand -- the legally correct one, and the right one for justice. Leadership, eh? Do you (and Andy9o8 too, or others following the case beyond the commercial media headlines), see (1) indication of specifically attributable prosecutorial misconduct? (2) Is there precedent for repercussions at the DOJ level? Any ROM guest-mations of likelihood? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #15 April 2, 2009 The discipline is getting more frequent. Last month here in Cali, a prosecutor was suspended for multiple acts of misconduct - one of which resulted in two convictions being overtyrned because he did not reveal the location of a witness who would destroy his case. Ever since the Duke lacrosse case it seems that the prosecutors are falling under increased scrutiny. This is good. However it takes somebody to report them. This uusually happens either by a judge or by a big press event. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #16 April 2, 2009 Specifically attributable prosecutorial misconduct? See my link - first full paragraph of page 2. The DOJ owned up to it. Often times, the courts will reverse a conviction and order dismissal. It is (at least in Cali) a policy that prosecutorial misconduct is particularly vile because people lose freedom. To act as a disincentive appeals courts will reverse and no second chance. I am uncertain about the DOJ repercussions. The individual state bars can take action. Internally, the DOJ has its performance committee cited in the link, so there is likely some administrative action. However, the DOJ has more to worry about from defense lawyers who will try to make hay out of publicized suppression and lying by these attorneys. Note: I just noticed yesterday that Stevens' attorney is Brendan Sullivan. Most people my age and older will remember his famous quote to Senator Inouye, "I am not a potted plant.". He was Ollie North's counsel. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #17 April 2, 2009 BTW, did they simply drop the charges, leaving the Feds the option of refiling in the future? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #18 April 2, 2009 QuoteBTW, did they simply drop the charges, leaving the Feds the option of refiling in the future? No. the requested a dismissal "with prejudice." That means case closed - refiling would be the practical equivalent of double jeopardy. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #19 April 2, 2009 ok, that was my question. The RIAA loves to remove their claims, but without prejudice, whenever they see they're about to lose. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryzflies 0 #20 April 7, 2009 QuoteQuoteBTW, did they simply drop the charges, leaving the Feds the option of refiling in the future? No. the requested a dismissal "with prejudice." That means case closed - refiling would be the practical equivalent of double jeopardy. Bad news for the prosecutors: voices.washingtonpost.com/washingtonpostinvestigations/2009/04/tables_turn_on_stevens_prosecu.html?wprss=washingtonpostinvestigations After the last 8 years it's nice to finally have an AG with some integrity.If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #21 April 9, 2009 I had dinner a couple nights ago with an Israeli counter-terrorism prosecutor, specifically involved in prosecuting suicide bombing cases. (Pointing that out to indicate (1) he’s not got a domestic politics stake/partisanship, and (2) he’s got credible experience.) One of the topics of conversation was the dismissing of Sen Steven’s conviction. He speculated – and very much owned it as speculation – evidence/indication of prosecutorial conduct would impact other cases in which the defense has asserted that lack of sharing of evidence w/r/t client and specific details of charges. Guantanamo is a military court, currently. As Guantanamo closes and the remaining detainees that have not been cleared for release are tried in a yet-to-determined legal system (to deal with classified information) and in the US criminal system, he speculated on how allegations and potential evidence of prosecutorial misconduct will impact US efforts to try the remaining detainees. His strong assertion – and remember this is someone who has successfully prosecuted attempted suicide bombers and their accomplices – was that detainees should have been held and tried directly through US courts. It was also an edifying perspective for me on how one state, which arguably has to geal with the most continuous threat of terrorism, has used a law enforcement/criminal law model. (We talked about failures of that model as well.) It was fascinating to me to hear the lens through which he immediately viewed the dismissal of Sen Steven’s conviction. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
