Judge Holds Ted Stevens' Prosecutors in Contempt

By Jeralyn, Section Misconduct
Posted on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 08:59:00 AM EST
Tags: Ted Stevens (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Three federal prosecutors in the Ted Stevens' trial were held in contempt of court Friday for failing to comply with a federal court order to turn documents over to Stevens' defense team:

U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan called it "outrageous" that government lawyers would ignore his deadline for turning over documents.

Last month, Sullivan told the Justice Department to turn over all its internal communications regarding a whistleblower complaint against the FBI agent leading the investigation into the former Alaska senator.

More...

The judge gave the prosecutors a chance to explain their disregard of his order. They had no excuse.

"That was a court order," he bellowed. "That wasn't a request. I didn't ask for them out of the kindness of your hearts. . . . Isn't the Department of Justice taking court orders seriously these days?"

..."That's outrageous for the Department of Justice -- the largest law firm on the planet," he said. "That is not acceptable in this court."

At the heart of it all:

Last month, Sullivan told the Justice Department to turn over all its internal communications regarding a whistleblower complaint against the FBI agent leading the investigation into the former Alaska senator. The agent, Chad Joy, complained about some Justice Department tactics during the trial, including not turning over evidence, and an "inappropriate relationship" between another agent working the case and the prosecution's star witness.

The judge is mulling his options as to sanctions.

< Stimulus: Longest Congressional Vote in History | What Some Folks With Blogs Think >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

TalkLeft's DMCA Infringement Notice Policy

Judge Holds Ted Stevens' Prosecutors in Contempt | 9 comments (9 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

the pity of it, in this case, (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by cpinva on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 06:05:50 AM EST

Imagine when it's just a little guy who would rather cave than fight for his innocence.

is that mr. stevens is neither a little guy, nor innocent. that said, he is entitled to a fair trial, which is more than his party would prefer to give anyone.

Calling the Shots (none / 0) (#1)
by kidneystones on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 02:50:36 AM EST

The decision to continue kidnapping people around the world (rendition)and the decision to rip the Census from Commerce indicates a highly selective approach to rule of law. Justice ignores lawful demands from a judge. Meanwhile, Ha'aretz reports that the EU and the White House have decided to try to influence the form of Israel's next government, while claiming at the same time that the composition of Israel's next government is an 'internal matter', as long as it isn't a right-wing alliance. Har'aretz reports that the White House, along with the EU, are trying to shape the composition of Israel's next government. Bibi is the least worst alternative, it seems, as the new administration struggles to find a political solution to Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons.

Anyone see cause for optimism?

: Does your comment have to do (none / 0) (#2)
by Jeralyn on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 02:53:50 AM EST

with Ted Stevens' case? Please try to keep your comments on topic, except for open threads where all topics are welcome. Thank.

Respect for the law (none / 0) (#3)
by kidneystones on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 03:16:22 AM EST

Justice has no lawful justification for refusing to comply with the judge's demands, if I understand your post correctly. The question for me, then, is whether the new administration has more or less respect for rule of law than the former administration. Point taken.

Prosecutors don't have enough... (none / 0) (#4)
by citizen53 on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 03:44:43 AM EST

with the resources and power of the State behind them. Too often they must abuse the power in their own biased view of performing justice. Imagine when it's just a little guy who would rather cave than fight for his innocence.

Here's more background (none / 0) (#6)
by jbindc on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 08:24:30 AM EST

Some of this stuff came out while the trial was going on:

: That's an excellent link! (none / 0) (#8)
by Jacob Freeze on Sun Feb 15, 2009 at 09:37:51 AM EST

Apparently opposing attorneys almost got into a street-fight in open court!

"This can't be undone," he thundered, speaking directly up to the judge from a podium less than 10 feet away. Clutching his chest, he said, "My heart's beating twice as fast as it should be for a 66-year-old man. This can't happen in court."
As he accused the prosecution of misconduct, Morris leapt to her feet and got within inches of him, her voiced raised as well.
"He called me out," she told the judge as he tried to calm the situation.
Harharharhar!!!
It sounds like a combination of Jerry Springer and Judge Judy!

WTF? (none / 0) (#7)
by kaleidescope on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 03:35:21 PM EST

Does anyone have any idea why this happened? Was the DOJ consciously resisting complying with the judge's order? Or was it rank incompetence? Or a deliberate attempt to sabotage the case against Stevens?

Lawyers working for a private law firm -- especially in this market -- would be summarily fired if they screwed up this way.

Most of us here have experienced the arrogance and pride of Justice Department lawyers. In my field, environmental law, the DOJ even treats EPA lawyers like the DOJ is some major firm and the EPA is a law firm you find out about from a "Take One" flyer hanging from a subway car ad.

In most cases this arrogance is actually based on real performance. Some of the best environmental lawyers I know got their experience working for the DOJ.

Which is why the perennial Stevens case screw ups are so baffling. WTF?

Hmm, besides sanctions against prosecutors (none / 0) (#9)
by McKinless on Sun Feb 15, 2009 at 06:15:29 PM EST

is is possible the judge is considering a new trial for Stevens?