Tuesday, March 14, 2006

cheating and the war on terror

I looks like yet again, the Bush Justice Department has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. And yet again, they did so by violating the rules which prosecutors are supposed to play by. In Michigan, a case was thrown out after massive prosecutorial misconduct--Richard G. Convertino (the lead prosecutor appointed by AG John Ashcroft) suppressed evidence that might have bolstered the defendants' claims of innocence.

In Virginia, the "20th hijacker" case involving a dude that liked al Qaeda but never actually was part of the plot and might have sorta known about it, the Bush appointees got two witnesses on the phone together and discussed their testimoney, and read back to them parts of the trial transcript. This is highly unethical and violates the exclusionary rule in the Federal Rules of Evidence. The upshot is that the death penalty is off the table for the jurors.

These are just two of the many terror cases the Bush Justice Department has bungled since 9/11. Remember that 'sleeper cell' near Buffalo, NY? All they could get them on was traveling to Afghanistan and going to an Al-Qeada camp...a crime they called "providing support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization."

Is it that these cases are hard to try? That the evidence is always scanty? Or is it that these prosecutors are eagarly tring to make a name for themselves, and in so doing cross the line? It has to be more than a coincidence.

No comments: