Siegelman's fight for Justice: Federal Prosecutors say judge shouldn't recuse himself!!!

[JohnWxy]

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/29/759286/-Prosecutors-in-Siegelman-Case-Have-No-Shame

Federal prosecutors in Alabama argue in a new motion that U.S. District Judge Mark Fuller acted impartially in the Don Siegelman case and should not recuse himself from further proceedings.

The prosecutors evidently wrote this argument with a straight face, while preparing a response on a motion to recuse from Siegelman's codefendant, former HealthSouth Corp. CEO Richard Scrushy.

At the heart of the prosecution's response is this novel idea: It's perfectly fine for jurors to be swapping e-mails during the course of a criminal trial.

RogerShuler's diary :: ::
To no one's surprise, Siegelman was not amused. In a written response, the former governor said:

"The government farcically argues that the trial judge and 11th Circuit decided in my case that the system operated fairly for me because the trial judge assumed that the emails from Juror # 7 and Juror # 40 were "authentic" and so when he denied our motion for a new trial, based on those emails, both Courts said that it's OK for jurors to be emailing each other before the close of the Government's case, OK to be in a a conspiracy to subvert the defendant's constitutional right to a fair trial."

(more)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This really is a case of someone (Don Siegelman, former governor of Alabama) being prosecuted because of his party afiliation. Seriously people, this could be you or me next time. If EVER you wanted to "fight the good fight" NOW IS THE TIME.

The Federal Prosecution of this man was one (the most egregious case) of several political purges by the Cheney administration.


If you feel no one should be subjected to political prosecution by our government please contact President Obama at www.whitehouse.gov/contact/


The prosecutors involved in the intitial prosecution are guilty of malfeasance at the very least. There are multiple questions about the conduct of the prosecution in the original case. Now, they are saying the judge in the original case should not have to recuse himself... I think the judge and the prosecutors should be investigated and if wrongdoing is found they should be prosecuted and possibly disbarred.

[RandomThoughts]

1. It seems he was prosecuted for political reasons.

And from news reports what he was prosecuted for does not seem to be different that is done in many other places where there are not prosecutions.

New Evidence In Siegelman Case Points To Republican Cabal
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/13/new-evidence-in-siegelman_n_91186.html



CBS: More Prosecutorial Misconduct in Siegelman Case
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/02/hbc-90002487
Even the news article about his trial was blocked in his home state by being blacked out when broadcast on TV.

The CBS piece, for which I was repeatedly interviewed, came through on its promise to deliver several additional bombshells. The most significant of these was the disclosure that prosecutors pushed the case forward and secured a conviction relying on evidence that they knew or should have known was false, and that they failed to turnover potentially exculpatory evidence to defense counsel. The accusation was dramatically reinforced by the Justice Department’s failure to offer a denial. It delivered a fairly elaborate version of a “no comment,” and even that came a full twenty-four hours after it had conferred with the prosecutors in question. The gravity of the accusations made and the prosecutors’ failure to deny them further escalates concerns about the treatment of the former Alabama governor.


If he is guilty then either all people that do the same thing need to be prosecuted equally with same rules, Or if he is innocent all people like him need to be freed from jail.

The fact that his prosecution is not the same as other people means he should be set free or there should be many more prosecutions.


This seems to be connected to Rove's attorney firings also, since he was treating Justice department as a political enforcement wing of the Bush Administration with multiple requests to pursue cases that had no merit from other prosecutors.

Note also that people refused to appear to a subpoena about this trial, and were not thrown in jail. Under Bush rules it is anarchy not Justice, and things need to be fixed not made worse.

[JohnWxy]

3. There is no "seems" about it. Seigelman was lynched because he is a Democrat.

The investigation of all these political prosecutions and the firing of US prosecutors who didn't display the kind of enthusiasm for it, that the Cheney administration wanted, seems to be moving at a glacial pace. We really need to bury the WH with emails demanding the Justice Dept stand for .... justice!

Siegelman was lynched. Scrushy lobbied for a position on a committee. THere was no bribery at all (no personal gain to Seigelman). (this is how Republicans hand out ambassordorships all the time.- although in their case, the money goes to their party - which IS illegal.) The court decision was flat wrong and a travesty. But there was also misconduct upon the part of the prosecution.

If people are complacent about this. If they do not show they will not stand for it then the fascists will only become emboldened.

[LiberalFighter]

2. Who is the prosecutor?