Charges eventually were dropped against those wrongly accused as a result of the controlled buys, said U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan at Pittsburgh, Pa., a special prosecutor in the case. Before then, one person was convicted and served about 16 months of a 10-year sentence; some served pretrial detention or no time in jail, she said.
Buchanan said the evidence includes the misidentification of a person who had provided drugs to the informant and recorded conversations that were scripted or prearranged. The prosecutor said she was appointed by the Justice Department to avoid an appearance of the conflict of interest among her counterpart in Ohio. She said the case should not hurt the credibility of other DEA cases.
Some of these cases went to trial. Others went to hearing. The Indictment against Lucas spells out his false testimony. No prosecutors were charged. Could they not see Lucas and Bray were lying when they ran them through their testimony before putting them on the stand? Or didn't they care?
Update: In one of the civil cases pending against Lucas and the DEA filed by Frank Douglas, one of those wrongfully charged, the following allegation is made:
40. Defendant DEA Special Agent Lee Lucas had a well-known record of manufacturing evidence to charge and prosecute persons for crimes with which they could not otherwise be charged or prosecuted. As a result of this history, in 2001 an FBI task force began investigating Lucas and others for making false reports and obstruction of justice. During the course of this investigation, members of the FBI task force met on August 21, 2003, with the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio, Greg White in order to discuss whether the U.S. Attorney’s office should continue to prosecute any cases investigated by Agent Lucas. Present at that meeting were several DEA supervisors. During the meeting, U.S. Attorney White referred to Lucas as a “rogue agent,” and as a result of the
information provided by the FBI task force during this meeting, U.S. Attorney White issued an order directing that no criminal charges based on an investigation conducted by Agent Lucas be indicted or prosecuted unless the allegations could be corroborated by at least one other witness. The matters discussed at this meeting were documented by both the FBI and DEA, and the documentation was distributed through the chain of command at the DEA, including but not limited to the Defendant DEA supervisors listed in this
Complaint, all of whom were familiar with the particulars of the FBI investigation prior to Agent Lucas’ involvement in “Operation Turnaround.”
41. Despite U.S. Attorney’s White’s 2003 order, the DEA assigned Lucas to the Mansfield area for the purpose of overseeing “Operation Turnaround.” Agent Lucas began leading the activity conducted in connection with “Operation Turnaround” beginning in the summer of 2005, and continuing at al times throughout the investigation, arrest and prosecution of Plaintiff ....
