Judge Could Dismiss Stevens's Indictment or Declare Mistrial

[maddezmom]

Source: Washington Post

Judge Could Dismiss Stevens's Indictment or Declare Mistrial
Prosecutors Wait Until Last Minute to Disclose Potentially Exculpatory Material


By Del Quentin Wilber and Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, October 2, 2008; 10:53 AM

A federal judge this morning scolded lawyers prosecuting Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens (R) on ethics charges for waiting until the last minute to disclose potentially exculpatory material, and said he would hear arguments today from defense attorneys about whether to dismiss the indictment or declare a mistrial.

U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan said the powerful, 40-year-senator "would not be getting a fair trial if it were up to the government." He halted trial testimony so lawyers could prepare for a 4:30 p.m. hearing on motions to end the case or impose sanctions on the government.

Stevens is charged with failing to disclose that an energy company executive who contributed to his campaigns also extensively renovated Stevens's Alaska home without charging him for the work.

The potentially exculpatory material involves remarks by the executive, Bill Allen, a key prosecution witness, who said he believed Stevens would have paid for the renovations if the Allen had ever billed him. Attorneys for the government did not disclose those remarks until late yesterday. In court this morning, prosecutor

Brenda Morris acknowledged that the information should have been provided earlier, but also argued that Stevens's lawyers could still cross-examine Allen on what he had said.



Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/02/AR2008100201492.html?hpid=topnews

[scytherius]

1. While I can't STAND Stevens and he is a crook . . .

I hope the judge dismisses it. I was an atty for 20 years and prosecutors pulled this shit ALL the time. This move is the height of incompetence by the U. S. Attorneys. It's just flat horrible. I hope the judge nails them.

[pacalo]

2. It's not too late, though, if the witness can still be questioned by the defense.

While I agree with you about the trickery, I don't see how it has hurt "Bridge to Nowhere" Stephens' case.

[Piewhacket]

5. now, now... nobody likes prosecutors who withhold evidence...

but the central issue is : did Stevens knowingly accept free stuff. right?

whether he would have paid for it if billed is extremely tenuous, if not irrelevant.
Is the witnesses opinion about what Stevens might do if given a bill
even admissible evidence? Well?

Did he know he got the ($250,000?) stuff? Did he know he didn't pay for it?
Didn't he wonder about that? Wouldn't you?

Mistrial, my ass. I don't buy it. Surely in twenty years of practice you have
seen WAY more serious violations blithely overlooked by judges, or swept away
with a derisive wave on appeal. You know, like the five witnesses including nuns
who saw the defendant in their town 100 miles away at the time of the crime!

So why does the rich powerful senator get such an unbelievable break?
Now I vehemently denounce Brady violations when I see 'em.
But geez. Mistrial? isn't that nuts?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

7. I think the judge is doing the right thing.

Prosecutions under Gonzales, Ashcroft and now Mukasy, have all suffered, as all the talented pros were pushed aside by the up and coming neocon reich wingers.

[cosmicone]

3. Perhaps this was the plan all along and the

US attorneys are complicit in this.

[L. Coyote]

4. Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner!!!

I have been waiting to see how the Bush Junta's DoJ was going to bomb this case for Stevens.
I have been ever more suspicious since Steven's good buddy Palin was put on the ticket.

[Piewhacket]

6. you guys are sooooooooo cynical.

whatcha drinkin. can I have some?

[Freddie Stubbs]

11. Wouldn't it ahve been easier to have never indicted him in the forst place?

:shrug:

[ben_meyers]

8. Charges against Alaska senator could be dismissed

Source: CNN

But Stevens' defense attorneys said prosecutors waited till Wednesday night to turn over crucial FBI notes on Allen. Those indicate that Allen believed that, had Stevens received invoices from the foreman or others for the Veco work, Stevens would have paid them.

Allen has testified he did not bill Stevens for some of the work.

The notes from the investigator indicate Allen did not fully bill for Veco's work because he felt the costs were higher than they need to be, and "partly because he did not want the defendant to have to pay."

On Wednesday, Allen acknowledged in testimony he failed to ask Stevens to pay for some work simply "because I like Ted."

A visibly angry federal Judge Emmet Sullivan agreed, saying, "It was gross negligence on the part of the government."



Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/stevens.trial/index.html

---

"gross negligence on the part of the government"? Isn't that why OJ is searching the golf courses for Nicole's killer?

[Ian David]

9. This happens ALL the time when they prosecute police. The prosecutor makes an "oops." n/t

[Phish]

10. Intentional Perhaps????

Naw.....<cough>bullsh!t<cough>.

[DogPoundPup]

12. Judge threatens to throw out corruption case against Ted Stevens

Source: LATimes


WASHINGTON - The judge overseeing the corruption trial of Sen. Ted Stevens threatened today to throw out the case against the long-serving Republican after prosecutors turned up last-minute evidence defense lawyers said was exculpatory.

U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, visibly angry, set a hearing for 4:30 p.m. EST today to weigh a request from Stevens' lawyers to dismiss the seven-count indictment in which Stevens is charged with failing to include more than $250,000 in gifts and home improvements in Senate financial disclosure forms.

The dispute centers on an interview between FBI agents and the government's star witness, Bill J. Allen, an Alaskan oilman who testified the last two days about how he oversaw the home renovations and gave Stevens other gifts and benefits.

The government previously turned over a redacted version of the FBI interview with Allen to defense lawyers but conceded today they had erred and that portions of the summary should not have been excised. They turned over the new evidence after discovering the oversight Wednesday night.


Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-stevens3-2008oct03,0,4030099.story