KaKaKarl update

Rove Skips House Judiciary Deposition

Submitted by Chip to afterdowningstreet on Tue, 2009-02-24 02:31.

John Bresnahan reports:

Former Bush adviser Karl Rove was a no-show today at his scheduled deposition deadline for the House Judiciary Committee's ongoing probe into the U.S. attorney firings -- setting up a major decision for President Obama on how to respond to congressional subpoenas.

Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) subpeonaed Rove to find out what he knows about the Dec. 2006 firings which eventually toppled former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

When Rove was subpoenaed in 2007, President Bush asserted "absolute immunity" for his top aides, refusing to allow them even to appear before a congressional panel. House Democrats eventually sued, and won an initial legal victory. The Bush White House, through the Justice Dept., appealed the ruling, and when Bush left office in January 2009, the case was still undecided.

White House Counsel Greg Craig has urged the two sides to cut a deal, but Rove and his attorney, Robert Luskin, have kicked it back to the White House, saying it is up to them to assert executive privilege or not.

So the next big development will occur on March 4, when the Obama administration is scheduled to file a motion in federal appeals court laying out its position on the issue.

Let's check out Dr. Cyril Wecht again

Oh, Joy! Looks the previous judge is in some hot water. That's FINE with me. That will give Dr. Cyril Wecht some free time to talk about WAR CRIMES.

Of course, we KNOW there are war criminals and we need to hear this message in the lamestream media NOW.

Three cheers for the News on Dr. Cyril Wecht !!!!

Here are some links to news about that case that came out today. Easier than putting them into any other order, if you ask me.

Virginia

Appeals Court To Decide If Cyril Wecht Has Retrial

KDKA - Pittsburgh,PA,USAPITTSBURGH (KDKA) ― A spirited give and take between a panel of federal appeals court judges and lawyers for the government and Dr. Cyril Wecht's defense ...See all stories on this topic

Wecht's lawyers argue for dismissal

Pittsburgh Tribune-Review - Pittsburgh,PA,USA

By Jason Cato

Lawyers for Dr. Cyril H. Wecht asked a federal appeals court today to dismiss his public corruption case, citing errors by the trial judge. ...See all stories on this topic

Wecht's lawyer asks appeals court to dismiss case

Philadelphia Inquirer - Philadelphia,PA,USA

AP PITTSBURGH -

Pathologist Cyril Wecht should not be retried on federal fraud and theft charges and the case against him should be dismissed, ...See all stories on this topic

Appeals judges hear Wecht's argument against new trial

Pittsburgh Post Gazette - Pittsburgh,PA,USA

Cyril H. Wecht. Dr. Wecht, the former Allegheny County Coroner, has asked that the charges against him be dismissed because he claims US District Judge ...See all stories on this topic

Swarovski’s green light for expansionWiener Zeitung - Wien,Austria... acquisition makes it

Media has right to know who sits in the jury box, appellate court ...

Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press - Arlington,VA,USA

Smith found that there was nothing so unusual about the case of Allegheny County Coroner Cyril H. Wecht that it would have warranted an anonymous jury, ...See all stories on this topic

Divided 3rd Circuit says jurors must be ID'd in coroner's trial

First Amendment Center - Nashville,TN,USA

Wecht overturned a federal judge's initial plan to keep the jurors' names from the public in the fraud trial earlier this year of former Allegheny County ...See all stories on this topic

Wecht's attorneys claim double jeopardy

Pittsburgh Post Gazette - Pittsburgh,PA,USA

This time, Dr. Wecht's defense will argue that Judge Schwab erred in declaring a mistrial in April following the declaration of a hung jury after 10 days of ...See all stories on this topic

Oral arguments to take place in Wecht retrial case

Philadelphia Inquirer - Philadelphia,PA,USA

AP PITTSBURGH - The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals is scheduled to hear oral arguments on whether celebrity pathologist Cyril Wecht should be retried on fraud ...See all stories on this topic

The Daily MuckTPM - New York,NY,USA(ADN)

A federal appeals court rejected Friday a plan to keep the jurors in the Cyril Wecht case anonymous. A US District Court judge had proposed a plan of ...

Wecht's lawyer asks appeals court to dismiss case

PITTSBURGH - Pathologist Cyril Wecht should not be retried on federal fraud and theft charges and the case against him should be dismissed, his lawyer told an appellate court on Monday.

Pennsylvania News Headlines from... - http://www.phillyburbs.com/

Panel criticizes Wecht judge

The federal appeals panel says the blame lies with US District Judge Arthur J. Schwab, not the jury that deadlocked on a verdict in the public corruption trial of the former Allegheny County coroner.Tribune-Review News - http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/

FBI Agents Tampered With Wecht Jury, Beyond What 3rd Circuit Permitted

By testing

With regard to the rights of defendant Wecht, the July 13, 2006 order of the Board of Judges and the District Judge’s proposed voir dire process for this case should be modified to disclose more information. The parties should be given ...Cafe Talk - http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/

"Appeals judges hear Wecht's argument against new trial"

By Howard Bashman "

Appeals judges hear Wecht's argument against new trial":

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has this news update. And Jason Cato of The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has a news update headlined "Wecht's lawyers argue for dismissal."

How Appealing - http://howappealing.law.com/

Wecht's lawyers argue for dismissal

Lawyers for Dr. Cyril H. Wecht asked a federal appeals court today to dismiss his public corruption case, citing errors by the trial judge.

PittsburghLIVE.com - http://www.pittsburghlive.com

Wecht Lawyers: New Trial Would Be Double Jeopardy

Aug 4, 2008 ... Attorneys for Dr. Cyril Wecht are hoping to help their client avoid a second corruption trial. Lawyers are going to be in federal appeals ...

Appeals court: Wecht jurors must be identified
Ruling overturned judge's plan to withhold names in celebrity coroner's fraud trial.
August 3, 2008

A federal appeals court has rejected the use of anonymous jurors in a coroner's trial, calling their identification a ''well-established part of American judicial tradition.''The 118-page ruling Friday overturned a district court judge's initial plan to keep the jurors' names from the public in the fraud trial earlier this year of former Allegheny County Coroner Cyril Wecht.U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Schwab had proposed the plan to prevent news agencies from interviewing the families or friends of prospective jurors. But the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, siding with news organizations and Wecht, blocked Schwab's plan in a brief order issued in January, before trial.Despite the order, the judge only allowed the names of the seated jurors to be read once in open court.

The 3rd Circuit noted that nearly all defendants have friends and enemies, so the court said Schwab's reasoning ''would justify anonymity in virtually every jury trial, whether or not it attracts media attention.''''Of course, in a given case, a risk of jury tampering or excessive media harassment may exist,'' Judges D. Brooks Smith wrote for the 2-1 majority. ''But we are satisfied that district judges are well-positioned to address these risks on a case-by-case basis, and in such cases, to make particularized findings on the record.

''The ruling comes just days before the 3rd Circuit hears arguments in Wecht's appeal. His trial ended in a hung jury in April, and his lawyers hope to avert a new trial on double-jeopardy grounds. Arguments on that issue are slated for Monday.

Circuit Judge Franklin S. Van Antwerpen dissented, saying the decision will cause problems at the district level. ''It amounts to impermissible micromanagement of procedures and decisions that are properly delegated to the discretion of district judges,'' Van Antwerpen wrote.Wecht is accused of using his former county office staff to do work that benefited his private practice.

Lawyer David J. Bird, who represents the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, called Friday's opinion important.The decision ''should create a precedent that makes it clear that in most circumstances the use of a truly anonymous jury will not be proper,'' Bird said.

update on Wecht (guess who's winning !!)

Appeals court: Wecht jurors must be identified

Saturday, August 2, 2008 5:00 PM EDT

PITTSBURGH (AP) — A federal appeals court has rejected the use of anonymous jurors in a coroner’s trial, calling their identification a “well-established part of American judicial tradition.” The 118-page ruling Friday overturned a district court judge’s initial plan to keep the jurors’ names from the public in the fraud trial earlier this year of former Allegheny County Coroner Cyril Wecht. U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Schwab had proposed the plan to prevent news agencies from interviewing the families or friends of prospective jurors. But the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, siding with news organizations and Wecht, blocked Schwab’s plan in a brief order issued in January, before trial. Despite the order, the judge only allowed the names of the seated jurors to be read once in open court, and later issued a list of all prospective jurors, without distinguishing who had been chosen. The 3rd Circuit noted that nearly all defendants have friends and enemies, so the court said Schwab’s reasoning “would justify anonymity in virtually every jury trial, whether or not it attracts media attention.” “Of course, in a given case, a risk of jury tampering or excessive media harassment may exist,” Judges D. Brooks Smith wrote for the 2-1 majority. “But we are satisfied that district judges are well-positioned to address these risks on a case-by-case basis, and in such cases, to make particularized findings on the record.” The ruling comes just days before the 3rd Circuit hears arguments in Wecht’s appeal. His trial ended in a hung jury in April, and his lawyers hope to avert a new trial on double-jeopardy grounds. Arguments on that issue are scheduled for Monday. Circuit Judge Franklin S. Van Antwerpen dissented, saying the decision will cause problems at the district level. “It amounts to impermissible micromanagement of procedures and decisions that are properly delegated to the discretion of district judges,” Van Antwerpen wrote. Wecht is accused of using his former county office staff to do work that benefited his lucrative private practice. Lawyer David J. Bird, who represents the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, called Friday’s opinion important. The decision “should create a precedent that makes it clear that in most circumstances the use of a truly anonymous jury will not be proper,” Bird said.

Arguments Set In Aug. For Wecht Retrial Case

PITTSBURGH (KDKA/AP) ― A federal appeals court has set a date for oral arguments to begin on whether former Allegheny County Coroner Dr. Cyril Wecht should be retried on theft and fraud charges.

A three-judge panel is now set to hear arguments on August 4th.

Wecht is accused of using his former government office to do work that benefited his private practice.

His first trial ended with a hung jury in April.

Wecht's attorneys claim a retrial would be double jeopardy.

But U.S. District Judge Arthur Schwab and prosecutors say retrying Wecht doesn't constitute double jeopardy because Wecht's attorneys moved for a mistrial when the jury was deadlocked.

Statement from Joseph and Valerie Wilson in Response to Pres. Bush's Assertion of Executive Privilege to Protect V.P. Cheney

Last update: 1:43 p.m. EDT July 16, 2008

WASHINGTON, Jul 16, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- "Today the president took the unprecedented step of asserting executive privilege to thwart congressional efforts to review Vice President Cheney's interview with Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald concerning the betrayal of Valerie Wilson's covert CIA identity. We agree with Congressman Waxman that the position taken by the president is ludicrous.

The American people have a right to know what role the vice president played in the leak of Ms. Wilson's covert identity for political purposes. The fact that the Attorney General is recommending the assertion of executive privilege reveals that this Department of Justice is as beholden to the White House as that run by former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

Given the White House's continued efforts to cover up the truth and subvert legitimate congressional inquiries, our civil suit may be the only way the American people will learn the truth. We seek to hold those public officials responsible for this serious breach of national security accountable for their actions, and to ensure that future generations of public servants are not tempted to engage in similarly despicable behavior."

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is a non-profit legal watchdog group dedicated to holding public officials accountable for their actions. For more information, please visit www.citizensforethics.org or contact Naomi Seligman at 202.408.5565/nseligman@citizensforethics.org.

SOURCE: Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)

CREW
Naomi Seligman, 202-408-5565

Copyright Business Wire 2008

Wecht prosecutor leaving U.S. attorney's office

Friday, July 11, 2008

By Paula Reed Ward, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The federal prosecutor who led the case against former Allegheny County Coroner Dr. Cyril H. Wecht is leaving the U.S. attorney's office.

Stephen S. Stallings, 40, who came to the Pittsburgh office from Miami, will join the Pittsburgh law office of Dreier LLP as a partner.

His focus will be on white-collar criminal defense, internal investigations and commercial and securities litigation.

U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan said she spoke with Mr. Stallings long ago about his plans to return to private practice. She had asked that he stay on through the Wecht trial.

"I feel he has honored his commitment to the office," Ms. Buchanan said. "It's unclear when the Wecht case will be resolved, and I wouldn't expect for him to delay his plans indefinitely."

The first trial ended in a hung jury in April. The government has said it will retry the case, but it is currently on appeal with the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Mr. Stallings came to Pittsburgh, his wife's hometown, in 2004 after spending three years in the U.S. attorney's office in Miami. There, he prosecuted domestic and foreign public corruption cases, including a $170 million bank fraud case.

Since his arrival here, he has led a number of high-profile public corruption cases, among them the prosecutions of several members of the Allegheny County sheriff's office including Chief Deputy Sheriff Dennis Skosnik, who pleaded guilty to bribery, tampering with a witness, mail and wire fraud and money laundering.

Leo M. Dillon, chief of the U.S. attorney's criminal division, will replace Mr. Stallings in the Wecht case.

Jerry McDevitt, one of Dr. Wecht's defense attorneys, said that with Mr. Stallings leaving the office, the case against his client should end.

"The decision of the lead prosecutor responsible for the investigation and unsuccessful prosecution of Dr. Wecht to move on with his life is yet another reason -- not that any more were needed -- to formally end this case so that all concerned can move on with their lives also," Mr. McDevitt said.

"With the departure of Mr. Stallings, all the prosecutors involved in the underlying investigation are now no longer even on the case, and the lead FBI case agent was reassigned to administrative duties long ago."

Former U.S. Attorney Frederick W. Thieman said that turnover in the federal prosecutor's office is normal.

"It's not unusual at all to have an attorney pick up a case in mid-investigation, at the time of trial or at the time of retrial," he said.

The more complicated a case is, he said, the more difficult a transition it might be.

"In a perfect world, you would like to keep the team intact, but the office is set up to handle that," Mr. Thieman said. "It's not like you lose all institutional knowledge."

Mr. Dillon was an Allegheny County assistant district attorney who helped prosecute the former coroner in Common Pleas Court in the early 1980s. A jury acquitted Dr. Wecht on one charge of theft of services after deliberating for 10 hours.

Mr. Dillon spent 11 years as an assistant district attorney before joining the U.S. attorney's office in 1988.

He has been reviewing transcripts in the Wecht case for the past several weeks, Ms. Buchanan said.

At New York City-based Dreier, Mr. Stallings will join Thomas J. Farrell -- another former assistant U.S. attorney -- and Jay K. Reisinger, who practice sports law.

It is not Mr. Stallings' first stint in private practice. Before becoming a prosecutor, he practiced complex commercial civil litigation in Miami for 10 years.

Paula Reed Ward can be reached at pward@post-gazette.com or 412-263-2620.

First published on July 11, 2008 at 12:00 am

WAR CRIMES DOSSIER; Conyers subpoena to Michael Mukasey

For Immediate Release
6/27/2008

Conyers Issues Subpoena to DOJ for Valerie Plame Documents

For Immediate Release Contact: Jonathan Godfrey
June 27, 2008 Melanie Roussell

(Washington, DC)- House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) today issued a subpoena to the Department of Justice (DOJ) to provide to the committee a number of previously requested documents by July 9. The Subcommittee on Commercial and Adminstrative Law voted this week to authorize committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. to issue the subpoena at his discretion. The documents the committee is seeking cover a broad range of issues including the Valerie Plame leak, allegations of selective prosecution, and other matters. The subpoena is here.


##110-JUD-062708##

Justice guilty of political hiring: La Times

A report found young applicants deemed liberal or Democrat were rejected for jobs.

By RICHARD B. SCHMITT, Los Angeles Times

Last update: June 24, 2008 - 10:55 PM

WASHINGTON - Scores of highly credentialed young lawyers and law students were denied interviews for coveted positions at the Justice Department because of an illegal screening process that took political and ideological views and affiliations into account rather than merit, Justice Department investigators concluded in a report released Tuesday.

In 2006, some applicants for sought-after jobs in the department's honors program and summer intern program were rejected because they were members of the American Constitution Society or Planned Parenthood or because they expressed concern about gender discrimination in the military, the report found.

Other students or graduates who were brushed aside included a University of Alabama law graduate, ranked sixth in the class, who had written a paper on the detention of aliens under the USA Patriot Act, a Yale Law School graduate who was fluent in Arabic and a Georgetown law student who had worked for Sen. John Kerry's presidential campaign.

In another case, a Harvard Law student was passed over after criticizing the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.

Justice Department officials told investigators the applicants were turned down for reasons of academic performance. But most, if not all, of the applicants had superior records, and those explanations were not deemed credible, according to the report.

Career staff and other senior officials openly complained about bias in the process, but their complaints were ignored, investigators found.

"When it comes to the hiring of nonpartisan career attorneys, our system of justice should not be corrupted by partisan politics," said Rep. John Conyers Jr., D-Mich., chairman of the Judiciary Committee. "It appears the politicization at Justice was so pervasive that even interns had to pass a partisan litmus test."

WAR CRIMES DOSSIER: Lawyers, alleged terrorists consult on court ruling

Lawyers, alleged terrorists consult on court ruling

GUANTANAMO BAY NAVY BASE, Cuba — Bolstered by a U.S. Supreme Court victory, defense attorneys streamed onto this base Monday to consult alleged al Qaeda captives on whether to sue in federal court over their war-on-terror detention.

The lawyers arrived by early-morning charter from Washington, D.C., organized by the Pentagon’s Office of Military Commissions to ferry lawyers, staff and observers to this week’s hearings for two detainees who were captured, separately, as teenagers in Afghanistan.

Canadian Omar Khadr, accused of the July 2002 grenade killing of a U.S. soldier, Wednesday goes before a new war court judge, Army Col. Patrick Parrish. Khadr’s original judge is retiring.

Then Thursday, an Air Force defense attorney is calling witnesses to argue for dismissal of war crimes charges against Afghan Mohammed Jawad, accused of maiming two other U.S. soldiers in a different grenade attack in a Kabul marketplace.

The military commissions hearings are the first since the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the 270 ”enemy combatants” at this remote U.S. Navy base can, one by one, challenge their detention in federal courts, through habeas corpus petitions.

The Supreme Court decision effectively allows civilian judges to independently evaluate Pentagon findings that the foreign prisoners are too dangerous to be let go, or sent home.

It also undermined the Bush administration doctrine that sought to curb detainee rights by keeping them here, offshore.

”The landscape has changed,” declared Navy Lt. Cmdr. Brian Mizer, defense attorney for Osama bin Laden’s driver.

His client is Salim Hamdan, a Yemeni on track to face trial by military commission later this summer, becoming the first Guantánamo detainee to face the first U.S. war crimes tribunals since World War II.

Australian al Qaeda foot soldier David Hicks earlier averted trial by pleading guilty to a war crimes charge in exchange for a nine-month sentence. He is free.

Monday, Mizer joined the lawyers’ pilgrimage to the prison camps from the Washington Beltway to consult with Hamdan as well as his other client, alleged 9/11 co-conspirator Ammar al Baluchi, facing death if convicted.

Also arriving were the four lawyers for alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed, Baluchi’s uncle; the Army defense attorney for Ahmed Khalfan Ghalani, accused of the 1998 East Africa Embassy bombings; and counsel to Saudi captive Mustafa Hawsawi, accused of financing the 9/11 hijackers.

For his part, Attorney General Michael Mukasey and other Justice Department officials said the Supreme Court ruling would have no impact on the war crimes trials where the Pentagon plans to try up to 80 detainees.

Pentagon prosecutors and Bush administration advocates argue that the point of the war court is that war-on-terror detainees don’t get the same rights as U.S. citizens.

But Mizer and other war court lawyers argue that detainees facing trial can use the habeas corpus petitions as a tool to contest their charges as well, invoking a range of constitutional rights.

As captives, the argument goes, they were interrogated without the right to remain silent, subjected to ”cruel and unusual punishment” and are facing ex post facto charges for crimes enacted after they were allegedly committed.

Unclear Monday was whether the alleged architect of the Sept. 11 terror attacks would seek to sue for his freedom to avert or delay the Pentagon’s complex war crimes case, which seeks the death penalty for five alleged conspirators in the mass murder of 2,973 men, women and children in New York, the Pentagon and a Pennsylvania field.

”We’re going to talk to him about his options,” said Boise, Idaho, lawyer David Nevin, a civilian criminal defense attorney chosen by the American Civil Liberties Union to defend Mohammed, known in CIA circles as KSM.

”I’m going to talk to Mr. Mohammed about where he wants to go from here,” he added.

The meeting would be the first since Mohammed’s June 5 arraignment, in which Mohammed said he would defend himself at trial — and would welcome martyrdom were the U.S. to execute him.

Now that the Supreme Court has given detainees recourse to civilian courts in a case called Boumediene vs. Bush, the question is whether Mohammed wants attorneys to file a habeas corpus petition on his behalf — claiming his detention is unlawful.

The Supreme Court ruling ”may change our client’s perspective. But I don’t have the faintest idea,” said Navy Reserves Capt. Prescott Prince, KSM’s Pentagon-appointed defense lawyer.

Also, lawyers who had been shuttling to remote Guantánamo for years noted that the Supreme Court ruling rendered this outpost useless to the degree that it did not seal off detainees from recourse to the U.S. Constitution.

”The thing about Boumediene is, we really don’t need to be down here any more,” said Navy Lt. Cmdr. William Kuebler, a military defense attorney, as he rode a ferry crossing Guantánamo Bay ahead of Wednesday’s hearing for the Canadian captive, Khadr.

Here we go, another fine George BuZh special: Brianna Waters

It's been mentioned to me, that I sometimes post without giving SOLUTIONS. In this particular case,

I have a SOLUTION: put the FBI on trial instead.

The domestic behavior of the FBI is a serious calamity (ask me, I KNOW).

I am not advocating environmental terrorism; I am for EDUCATION for that is the way we get over ignorance, stoppidity and greed and the apathy that supports it.

Unfortunately, as has been pointed out, the North American universities have been subverted, becoming places of corporate research and not truly dedicated to teaching; something that is now going to take a long time to "cure". And it doesn't suprise me that students get "waylaid" instead of taking a longer term view.

But BuZh's FBI is so wildly out of control, the distrust of American society SO high, nearly anything that happens with the confines of the US shouldn't come a great shock to anyone.

It will be more than "interesting" to see the verdict handed down in the Briana Waters' trial. The entire world that reads is watching !

I spent the afternoon reading the trial testimony; surely surely this is a very bad trial and there are still questions to be answered. (*Also note: it isn't mentioned in the article don't mention that the arson was because there was research being done on GM trees .. but they might lose their Monsanto advertising, eh?)

Meanwhile the real environmental TERRORISTS go free. It was sickening to watch the grilling of the head of the EPA in CONgress this week - and then watch him waltz off and continue to get paid taxpayer dollars! Thanks so much, Henry Waxman !

All this to preserve a corrupt and ridiculous election; predetermined by computer chips.

Of course, we've ALL given up on impeachment by now.

Let the war crimes trials begin - and let it start with the environmental CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY perpetrated and funded by the US CONgress and inflicted on us ALL by the neocons.

Veegermatic (sitting in the courtroom in absentia)

Sentencing postponed in UW arson case

05:39 PM PDT on Friday, May 30, 2008

By KING5.com Staff

KING

A judge on Friday postponed the sentencing for Briana Waters, pictured here at a previous hearing.

SEATTLE – A judge on Friday postponed indefinitely the sentencing for Briana Waters, who was convicted in March after a jury trial of assisting in the 2001 arson at the University of Washington Center for Urban Horticulture.

The judge ordered that Waters must remain in custody pending further orders from the court.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney's Office expects a new date for the sentencing will be set next week.

Related Content

Guilty verdict in UW arson case

Earlier in the day, the defense filed a motion asking for a postponement and asking that Waters be allowed to be free on bail.

The defense said that newly discovered information regarding one of the witnesses at the trial raised questions that required further investigation.

GOP Contender Tied to Attorney Firing By Jason Leopold May 28, 2008

Though virtually unknown outside the Albuquerque area, Bernalillo County Sheriff Darren White is betting that his conservative credentials and close ties to the White House will help Republicans retain the hotly contested New Mexico congressional seat being vacated by Rep. Heather Wilson.

Wilson, in turn, is campaigning hard for the Senate seat that Republican Pete Domenici has held for 36 years in a race that could go a long way toward determining whether Democrats expand their narrow control of the U.S. Senate.

But all three of these Republicans – Domenici, Wilson and White – have something else in common: They all were implicated in the firing of New Mexico’s U.S. Attorney David Iglesias as part of the White House-driven federal prosecutor purge in 2006.

Wilson is currently the subject of a preliminary House ethics probe related to a phone call she placed to Iglesias just a few weeks before the 2006 midterm elections, inquiring about the status of an indictment against a prominent Democrat in the state.

Domenici was the subject of a similar probe in the Senate over a call he made to Iglesias about the timing of indictments, a call that the Senate Ethics Committee said created an “appearance of impropriety” in a formal admonishment of the six-term senator.

Sheriff White also reportedly was pushing Iglesias to crack down on Democratic-backed voter registration drives and then took his complaints about Iglesias’s lack of aggressiveness to Washington.

In a little-noticed article in the Albuquerque Journal at the height of the U.S. Attorney scandal, White said he was upset with Iglesias’s inaction against Democratic-back voter registration drives and other criminal issues.

White, who was New Mexico chairman of the Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign, confirmed that in spring 2006, he took his “complaints directly to the Department of Justice where he met with Attorney General [Alberto] Gonzales' chief of staff, Kyle Sampson and others," the Albuquerque Journal reported on April 15, 2007.

Sampson was chief of staff to Attorney General Gonzales and helped create the list of U.S. attorneys selected for dismissal, prosecutors who in Sampson’s phrase were not “loyal Bushies.”

Trip to Washington

According to interviews with several law enforcement officials in Bernalillo County and a review of documents, White traveled to Washington with two other Republican operatives in 2006 to complain to the Justice Department that Iglesias was balking at bringing criminal charges against what they called rampant voter fraud – and that he should be fired.

Law enforcement officials said White was accompanied by Mickey Barnett, a Republican lobbyist, and Pat Rogers, a Republican attorney, both of whom are based in New Mexico.

Rogers was affiliated with the American Center for Voting Rights, a now defunct non-profit organization that sought to defend voter rights and increase public confidence in the fairness and outcome of elections.

However, it has since emerged that the organization played a major role in suppressing the votes of people who intended to cast ballots for Democrats in various states.

Rogers is also the former chief counsel to the New Mexico Republican Party, and has been recommended by Domenici to replace Iglesias as U.S. Attorney for New Mexico.

Barnett, Rogers and White reportedly met with Monica Goodling, the Justice Department’s White House liaison who resigned last year for the role she played in the unusual firing of nine U.S. Attorneys in the middle of a President’s term.

Last May, House Democrats released a transcript of an interview between congressional investigators and senior Justice Department official Matthew Friedrich. He said that over breakfast in November 2006, Rogers and Barnett expressed frustration with Iglesias's refusal to pursue voter fraud cases and that they had spoken to Karl Rove and Domenici about getting Iglesias fired.

"I remember them repeating basically what they had said before in terms of unhappiness with Dave Iglesias and the fact that this case hadn't gone anyplace," said Friedrich, who last week was named to head the Justice Department’s Criminal Division.

"It was clear to me that they did not want him to be the U.S. Attorney. And they mentioned that they had essentially . . . they were sort of working towards that."

‘Slick Move’

Iglesias also had been hearing rumors in New Mexico political circles that White was the “third man” who personally complained to Justice Department officials that he was not pursuing voter fraud cases aggressively enough.

“I was advised by Republican insiders that Darren viewed me as competition for future elected office,” Iglesias said in an interview.

“So it was a slick move on his part to try to get me removed for ‘performance’ knowing that that stigma would diminish my future electability. The irony is that he could have called me and asked if I was considering running for Heather Wilson's seat. I would have said no.”

Iglesias said White also pressed him to prosecute voter fraud cases during the 2004 election. In the months before the general election, Iglesias said White showed up at the county clerk's office demanding to know if there were any questionable voter registrations on file.

Mary Herrera, the Bernalillo County clerk, told White that there were about 3,000 or so forms that were either incomplete or incorrectly filled out.

Bernalillo County had been the target of a massive grassroots effort by the group Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) to register voters, which paid off with about 65,000 newly registered voters.

Sheriff White intended to challenge the integrity of some of the names on the voter registration rolls, Iglesias wrote in a new book, In Justice: Inside the Scandal that Rocked the Bush Administration.

White seized upon the registration forms as evidence that ACORN submitted fraudulent registration forms. He held a press conference along with other Republican officials in the county to call attention to the matter.

Iglesias said he established an election fraud task force in September 2004 and spent more than two months probing claims of widespread voter fraud in his state.

"After examining the evidence, and in conjunction with the Justice Department Election Crimes Unit and the FBI, I could not find any cases I could prosecute beyond a reasonable doubt," Iglesias said. "Accordingly, I did not authorize any voter fraud related prosecutions."

Iglesias said he views White’s participation in his firing as an inappropriate attempt by a law-enforcement officer to pressure a prosecutor.

“I question his judgment is attempting to remove a U.S. Attorney who did not find any cases worth prosecuting related to voter fraud,” Iglesias said. “That shows a spectacular lack of understanding of how law enforcement works.

“Cops complain all the time that prosecutors don't take their cases, but it's incredibly rare for the cop to seek the removal of the prosecutor. But he was that highly politicized.”

White’s campaign refused to respond to questions about the sheriff’s role in Iglesias’s firing. Contacted at the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s station, White declined to comment for this story.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has launched an ad campaign against White that cites his role in Iglesias’s firing.

"A federal prosecutor was fired only after he refused to bend to political pressure Darren White helped orchestrate,” said Yoni Cohen, Western Regional Press Secretary for the DCCC. "If he were in Congress, White would likely be under investigation for violating ethical standards …

"Senator Domenici is paying the price for listening to Darren White -- he was punished by the Ethics Committee. The people of New Mexico deserve better than another Republican Member of Congress who believes playing politics is more important than playing by the rules and honoring America's system of checks and balances.”

Jason Leopold has launched a new Web site, The Public Record, at ww.pubrecord.org

WAR CRIMES DOSSIER: US government data show President ordered FBI agents to contact Wecht Jury

Subj: US government data show President ordered FBI agents to contact Wecht Jury

The Department of Justice Inspector General's office
shows the FBI has engaged in
illegal jury tampering.

The DOJ IG report and DOD data show the President ordered the FBI to question Wecht Jury members. The classified White House, DoJ, and DoD emails disclose names and establish the link between the President, the IT security industry, and information warfare against the jury members.

The DOJ IG report establishes a higher nexus outside DOJ including the President and White House. There is a striking contrast between FBI conduct in re FBI war crimes investigation (in action, appeal to standards) and the FBI contact with Wecht Jury members (meddling, defiance of standard).

The classified DoD emails establish the link between the President, DoD, DOJ and information warfare against civilians, largely contradicting DoD guidance.

Breach of FOIA Requirements For Unlawful Purposes

The redactions do not protect privacy, but (unsuccessfully) thwart oversight and examination of DoD connection through contractors to offensive and defensive coordination with NSA on information warfare against civilians.

No Right To See War Crimes Evidence

The President and legal counsel are denied the right to review how the classified DoD emails were reviewed; or what evidence on those classified emails show the link between the President and illegal information warfare against jury members. Legal counsel may request copies of this war crimes evidence through the war crimes prosecutor.

Inconsistent Story On FBI Involvement

The President cannot explain the contrast between the FBI actions in re POW and Wecht. The President cannot explain why the FBI agents did not object to the home interviews, but they did object to Geneva.

On the POW issues, the DOJ IG would have us believe the FBI was not following Geneva because the guidance was unclear. However, the DoD JAG comments show the opposite: The decision to not investigate had nothing to do with vague guidance or anything that would block the FBI.

The DoD JAG memos sows FBI agents were concerned about procedures. Something or someone higher than DOJ blocked investigations. No DOJ guidance blocked any investigation. The US Attorney was not, as they should have been, involved in war crimes investigations in violation of Geneva. The US Attorney cannot explain why they reversed themselves and were involved with FBI interviews of jury members.

The DOJ IG report shows efforts to discredit the FBI do not reconcile with the DOD JAG reports. DoD IG fails to discuss POW abuse, and misdirects to the "uncertainty" over torture. Geneva expressly prohibits all abuse. Nuremberg establishes the precedent for enforcing the laws of war. DOJ IG cannot explain this many years after Nuremberg, why the FBI agents were absurdly actively thwarted with "vague" guidance; but there was no FBI investigation of things they were concerned about.

US Attorney Failure To Enforce Nuremberg Precedents

The US attorney did not adequately involve themselves on US prosecutions of war crimes. Inexplicably, we're asked to believe the opposite in re Wecht: The US Attorney was involved.

The President cannot explain why the US Attorneys refused to act on Geneva; but did involve themselves in Wecht.

The President cannot explain why the US Attorney that had "no role" in blocking the FBI, did have a role in guiding the FBI in re Wecht.

Discredited DOJ IG Report

We question the DOJ IG conclusions. The DoD IG report on FBI conduct is misdirection from the failure to enforce Geneva. Nothing in DOJ blocked the FBI. DoJ IG admits it did not review all DoD guidance related to investigations. The report does not adequately discuss which guidance FBI agents relied to not investigate.

Classified DoD Emails Establish Link Between President and Illegal Information Warfare

DoD emails establish a US government connection with information security, data mining, digital forensics, and security management. The classified versions of the DOD redacted emails show the key information to establish a link between the President, contractors, and NSA on domestic information warfare.

The President will have to explain why he is using government connected contractors to wage information warfare against US targets; and when Congress was told about these exercises to fine tune information warfare capabilities against China and Russia.

Information Warfare: Illegal US Civilian Intimidation

The DOD emails show there were specific, by-name US military personnel in Iraq conducting information warfare against American civilians, US government personnel, and American media.

The US government data shows the President ordered FBI to contact the Wecht Jury.

Digital Security Nexus Linked with FISA and Geneva Violations

The DOD emails show the nexus of information warfare, digital data forensics, and security management was a secondary role of the Public affairs personnel linked with US military advisers. DoD public affairs office and security contractors have an offensive and defensive information warfare role.

The US Attorney was connected with the data forensics conference in 2007 discussing digital data forensics. By name White House and DOJ officials are linked with these discussion, substantially mirroring the classified versions of the DoD emails.

Wecht judge cancels 2nd date for trial
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, PA - 19 May 2008
... into the pool for future jury duty. Wecht, 77, of Squirrel Hill is accused of using his public office while Allegheny County coroner for personal gain. ...

Appeals court: Hold up on that Wecht retrial Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, PA - 9 May 2008 By The Tribune-Review An appeals court agreed to delay the start of Dr. Cyril H. Wecht's second federal public corruption trial. Jury selection was set to ... Wecht Retrial Delayed By Federal Appeals Court WPXI.com Court puts indefinite stay on Wecht trial Pittsburgh Post Gazette Appeals court stays pathologist Wecht's retrial Philadelphia Inquirer Anchorage Daily News (subscription) - The Oregonian - OregonLive.com all 18 news articles »

Oral arguments scheduled in Cyril Wecht appeal
Pittsburgh Post Gazette, PA - 15 May 2008
The 11-person jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict, however, and US District Judge Arthur J. Schwab declared a mistrial on April 8. Dr. Wecht's ...

See also:

President Left Calling Card in Wecht Jury Home Visits: Mary Buchanan's FBI Problem

From TPM Muckraker

The US Attorney in re the Wecht Case knew or should have known the FBI had a credibility problem.

The government would ask that we believe Buchanan supposedly knew something about the FBI, enough to supposedly order them to do something.

FBI agents "interviewed" Wecht Jury Members at their home, prompting Congressman Conyers to seek information from the Attorney General. AG Mukasey has not responded.

What Buchanan failed to mention in re the FBI home visits of Wecht Jury members was the small problem with Special Agent Bradley W. Orsini. Orsini at one time was a steller, sterling FBI agent, highly trained, weapon ceritified. With enough talent to be the FBI director, potential Senate nominee to lead the Department of Justice.

The Wecht Jury members raised concerns they were contacted at home by the FBI agents.

Buchanan has yet to explain why she alone directed the FBI to do anything given the cloud already hanging over the FBI. It defies reason for the US Attorney, on their own, to ignore the FBI discipline problem and send them to the homes of Wecht Jurors.

Special Agent Bradley W. Orsini discipline problem was so bad, Buchanan claimed the access to Orsini's personal data would be an invasion of privacy. Buchanan's "concern" and stellar legal arguments were not lost on the court, promptly ordering Orsini's records unsealed. And the White House is surprised the prosecutors didn't convince the jury?

This wasn't a minor problem with the FBI. This agent alone had four (4) DOJ OPR investigations into that agent between 1997 and 2000. Who does Buchanan, on her own, supposedly think is the "best" group to contact the Jury members?

We're asked to believe the first agency the US Attorney thought of when getting information from jurors were agents whose peers' idea of a "professional interaction" include:

Singing other agents' names to investigation reports because, "It was a convenience and a shortcut" -- Send these people to take notes about why Jury members were doing things?

Falsifying a chain of custody forms Prohibited sexual relations -- Send these people to jury members homes?

Threats against a subordinate -- Send these people in groups before jury members at home?

Damage government propery with fists by punching holes in office walls -- Send these people to jurors' homes?

Made unprofessional and insensitive remarks -- Send these people to talk to jury members?


Buchanan knew or should have know the above conduct was linked direct to one of the FBI agents involved with the case. It defies reason to suggest she didn't know. Buchanan said of the FBI agent:

The release of his personal information "would constitute an invasion of Agent Orsini's personal privacy".

Buchana's response? Rather than respecting the court order or the privacy of the jury members, she sends the tainted FBI back into the nexus, as if to dare the public: "Watch us." Did she get, 'em?

It defies reason to believe a US Attorney who knew there were problems with the FBI, and who hoped to keep that agents' records sealed, to then inexplicably reverse herself, cast aside caution, send the FBI in, and do the opposite with the juror names that she did with the FBI agent's case file. How many reversals has the President made on the Constitution, Iraq WMD, and "mission accomplished". His head has spun so many times, we need not question whether its still connected.

It defies reason to believe the US Attorney hoping to preserve the privacy of an FBI agent over discipline problems would reverse herself, unleash the FBI, and violate a court order. Buchanan most likely attempted to block the order to interact with the Wetch Jurors, and knew there would be a very bad public relations problem.

We've seen this president ignore discipline problems and DOJ OPR findings before. He blocked the DOJ OPR from reviewing the FBI. This President's idea of a loyal FBI agent is one who lies, abuses people, and misleads the FISA court.

It gets better. Who are the people who abused the NSLs and conducted warrantless searches? That's right, the FBI. The same FBI that were

"infected with deliberate and reckless falseshoolds"

Nobody should be surprised why the DoJ can't give a straight story on the FBI interviews of Wecht Jury members. They've gagged the DOJ OPR that might find the truth. Nobody but the President could be stupid enough to believe anyone could get away with using the same FBI agents -- who violated the Constitution and engaged in multiple disciplinary problems the DOJ OPR documented -- to conduct home visits of jury members.

This is the President's calling card he's leaving with Iraqi civilians. Send in the reckless to abuse people, and find someone else to blame. War crimes in Iraq. Jury tampering in America.

Same peas. Same stench of criminal activity. Only the President could issue such a stupid, reckless order to ignore common sense and DOJ OPR findings. His answer to bad news in the wake of his reckless decisions: Send in the people you would think would be the least helpful.

This is the same story as with the Iraq WMD, Iraq, and Guantanamo. This President creates a mess, and people are too shocked to believe this President might be involved. Prisoner abuse, torture, war crimes, illegal invasion: We've got those DOJ OLC memos.

But the President directing the FBI to conduct non-permitted jury contact. Child's play. There are holes in the wall to prove it. The chairs were destroyed. There were no WMD's under the President's carpet in his office.

"Never happened."

Discussion on blog comments needed !!

Has anyone who reads this noticed that during the past week, there has been a CHANGE in
in sign-in procedures to any sites within the last week.

I really encourage some discussion of why sign-in policies, agreements, or other things might have changed now.

Has anyone noticed an abrupt change also ??

I am finding that none of the comments but one are posting and being logged by Google ..

Virginia

Was U.S. Private Security Firm Spying for Kazakh Government?

Submitted by MichaelVail on Thu, 05/15/2008 - 5:09pm.

• Dariga Nazarbayeva
• GlobalOptions
• James Giffen
• Kazakhstan
• Spotlight
• War Machine
• World News

Harpers
Posted: 2008-05-15 17:49:57

That’s the question raised by this terrific Wall Street Journal story. The firm is GlobalOptions, an extremely well-connected company run by, among others, former FBI and CIA officials. The Kazakh government apparently retained GlobalOptions to monitor, and possibly seek to derail, a Justice Department investigation into James Giffen, an American oilman who is suspected of paying tens of millions of dollars in bribes to President Nursultan Nazarbayev.

Dariga Nazarbayeva, the Kazakh president’s powerful daughter, reportedly lined up the services of the private-security firm. (I met Dariga a few years ago at a reception at the Washington offices of GlobalOptions. She invited me to visit Kazakhstan and told me that if I took her up on the invitation I was certain to meet some beautiful local women. Quite a strange encounter.) In addition to being extremely “murky” in its operations, GlobalOptions was also (as I reported a few years ago) an Iraq war profiteer.

On Deborah Palfrey's SUICIDE: Matt Janovic

Why the Suicide of Deborah Jeane Palfrey Was Not Unexpected

[Ed. note: When someone is convicted their record is wiped-clean, please do in regards to Jeane's fate. Her record is now clean, and the assets they took from her are no longer the government's legally. ]

J-7/Tarpon Springs, Florida--I would like to express my deepest condolences to the family of the deceased Ms. Palfrey. This writer never met Jeane--as she liked to be called by friends--and I only spoke with her a few times telephonically--our correspondence occurred through the Internet. That doesn't make this any easier to write.

Jeane claimed--she claimed a lot of things, most-of-which were accurate--that James Grady, author of "Three Days of the Condor" told her (paraphrased), "They've handed you a gun to blow their heads off with." He wasn't wrong, and this story opened a door into things that most of us assumed were going on in Washington D.C. It confirmed our suspicions. Expect it to keep delivering.

What's disturbing is what Jeane told myself and others on the defense team: that she had had contact with Brent Wilkes, the convicted Poway defense contractor who bribed GOP Rep. Randall Cunningham, and likely many-many other congressmen, primarily Republican ones.

Predictably, the comment boards are already flowing with a lot of ignorant speculation that Jeane was somehow "murdered" by a "conspiracy." This is not only disrespectful to the memory of a human being who felt compelled to kill herself by hanging, it's cracked and has no basis in reality whatsoever.

Here's why: being a researcher on her defense team gave me an inside-view of things. Just weeks before the trial, Jeane sent this e-mail out to Jason Leopold--formerly of Talkout, whose editors forced him from covering the story this year--and forwarded it to the rest of us on the legal defense team. It contains an entire exchange in it for context. From February 28th, 2008 (paragraph-breaks added):

Jason… let’s put it like this, the bastards aren’t going to take me alive. Of course, anytime that you want to do an interview – I will make myself available. However, I doubt that I will be doing any interviews once I am in D.C., for the trial. –Best, Jeane


-----Original Message-----
From: jasonleopold@hotmail.com [mailto:jasonleopold@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 11:40 AM
To: jeanepalfrey@sprynet.com; 'Justice League'
Cc: myboigie@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: "D.C. Madam trial scheduled for April 7th" (Jeane Palfrey)...

Jeane

I have no doubt that you will prevail. Your fighting spirit is infectious. I am in the process of setting up my own shop. I will actually be in DC for your trial and would love to get you on camera theb for the new nesit if possible.

Best

Jason

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----

From: "Jeane Palfrey"

Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 11:25:30

To:"'Justice League'"

Cc:,

Subject: RE: "D.C. Madam trial scheduled for April 7th" (Jeane Palfrey)...

Bil… thanks for the kinds words. If USA’s can’t file racketeering charges, then who can? More specifically, who filed them in my case? -Jeane

-----Original Message-----

From: Justice League [mailto:spbiloxi00@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 11:11 AM

To: jeanepalfrey@sprynet.com

Cc: jason leopold

Subject: Re: "D.C. Madam trial scheduled for April 7th" (Jeane Palfrey)...

Good Morning Jeane:

Thanks for your update and concerns in your case. I am copying Jason. I will post your email on my blog and on the Newsinkling.org. Jason and I know that you are innocent. Just remember. This is a battle of a much corrupted justice system. And we are with you on the long haul no matter what happen. Keep in mind that your case is in the hands of 12 jurors. You are innocent until proven guilty.

Also, I wanted to bring this to you and Jason. I was watching a webcast of the House Judiciary Committee hearing that was held on Tuesday about the matter of the procedures of a Special Prosecutor. There were two panels of attorneys that were experinced attorneys that dealt with a Special Prosecutor or was a Special Prosecutor or Independent counsel. I watched carefully to the last person to testify in the second panel: USA and Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald. One the committee asked this question to Fitzgerald that was interesting:


Cannon: Distinction between special counsel and normal prosecutor.

Patrick Fitzgerald: One common misunderstanding is that we didn't follow DOJ guidelines. I was bound by those guidelines. Many of the procedures I was the decision maker. When you prosecute as USA, you have to follow the guidelines. In an ordinary case, USA has an awful lot of power. In many cases, the volume of our cases, we can bring charges that will imprison people with out possibility of parole. No wiretap without DOJ, no immunity for witnesses, no govt appeal or attorney or member of the media. USAs can't file racketeering charges.

I found the last part of Fitzgerald's statement about racketeering charges interesting. And I appreciate him explaining what the role of as an USA. His statement is a very clear indication on why certain USAs were fired, why certain USAs were selected as interims, and what role within the WH and AG played in allowing certain charges to stick on certain individuals for political and personal means, and finally the handpicking of certain judges in certain cases. It would be interesting on how much power [especially USA Taylor] the selected USA interims with the DOJ by the WH. Here is the link of the webcast. Fitzgerald's testimony is about 15 minutes toward the end: 2:20.52

http://judiciary.edgeboss.net/real/judiciary/commercial/comm022608.smi

Bil [Monique Rawlings]

On 2/28/08, Jeane Palfrey > wrote:

My and defense counsel's various efforts the past 17 months to resolve the charges levied against me by the Department of Justice have been unsuccessful. Therefore, a full-jury trial is scheduled to take place on April 7th, in Federal District Court, in Washington, D.C.

I intend to defend myself vigorously against the charges of racketeering, money laundering and conspiracy. I will call witnesses to testify on my behalf about the legal, sexual nature of my former business – Pamela Martin & Associates. These witnesses likely will be culled from the existing research – conducted over the past 8 months - by a variety of press/media, bloggers and interested third parties.

It should be noted ALL charges are predicated upon the seldom utilized Travel Act, which allows the Government to claim jurisdiction for ANY crime – including misdemeanor offenses such as prostitution – when state lines are crossed. In the course of regular business operation in the Washington, D.C. area, state lines are crossed routinely by any number of businesses, including escort services. In fact, all one has to do is quite literally cross the street in hundreds, if not thousands of locations in the vicinity to cross a state line.

The Travel Act is important here because – unlike the state misdemeanor crime of prostitution – the Travel Act can be used to satisfy the requirement of an SUA (specified unlawful activity), which must be in place in order for the Government, not only to claim jurisdiction, but to be able to charge racketeering, money laundering and conspiracy. Federal law recognizes dozens of SUAs. Normally, such activities involve murder, treason, rape, kidnapping, drug trafficking, white slavery, extortion, embezzlement, etc and subsequently are utilized to support broader crimes like racketeering and conspiracy.

Perhaps, it also should be stated (and clarified) the racketeering charge is based in part upon the belief my previous business – to this day - is an ongoing criminal enterprise. Pamela Martin & Associates ceased to exist the day phone service was disconnected by me, in August of 2006. Any/all affiliated parties went their separate ways, at this time. The money laundering charge has been built upon the fact that payment transaction was done through the U.S. Mail.

Since I did not live in the Washington, D.C. area, during the 13 year period, PM&A was a viable concern – there realistically was no other logistical way for the women in my employ to send agency revenue onto me. Lastly, conspiracy – from what I have been able to ascertain – ostensibly occurs when two minds agree to commit a crime. Strangely, a person also can conspire with himself/herself, without the inclusion of a second individual.

Without doubt, I am in the fight of my life.Unfortunately, the Government will not capitulate, nor will I in this extremely bizarre case; one,where no person other than myself–including all former clients and escorts-is being charged with any crime here. Technically the Government has been successful in making the charges against me work on paper.

As a result, I have no choice- nor have I ever had any alternative - but to fight on and clear my name via the facts of the case, particularly since - if convicted, federal sentencing guidelines allow for a maximum sentence of 55 years imprisonment. Realistically, it has been calculated I would receive 8 to 10 to 15 years. Nonetheless for me at age 51, such a harsh penalty would be tantamount to a virtual life sentence – stripping me of some of the most productive years remaining in my life.

Jeane Palfrey

There's an image I have of Blanche Palfrey finding her daughter's body, hanging in the shed outside of her residential trailer. It's an image that should stick in the minds of all the "Johns," the privileged ones, forever. This is the real face of our elected (and appointed) representatives, and Republican Senator David Vitter is hardly alone in all of this. This is the face of lawlessness, a profoundly sexist patriarchy...it is the face of a homegrown American Fascism.

This political and economic system uses women like Deborah Jeane Palfrey and her former escorts to facilitate government contracts. When things get uncovered, the press acts as gatekeepers, and they throw them away through prosecution. Jeane, I hardly knew you, but you didn't deserve this ending. I have to wonder what the dirty political prosecutors told you about sentencing, and whether it contributed to your decision to kill yourself. Your story will be told, and what I've learned in all of this will become public. This I vow.

Follow up information:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL NO. 07-046 (JR)

:

v. ::

DEBORAH JEANE PALFREY, :

:

Defendant. :

JOINT SUGGESTION OF DEATH AND ANTICIPATION

OF MOTION FOR ABATEMENT OF PROSECUTION

The United States of America, by and through its attorney, the United States Attorney for the

District of Columbia, in consultation with and with the concurrence of counsel for defendant, Preston

Burton, herewith files this joint suggestion of death. The parties file this suggestion on information

and belief that defendant, Deborah Jeane Palfrey, died on or about May 1, 2008. Once the certificate

of death is received, the parties will jointly move to abate the prosecution.

A defendant’s death is a basis for abatement of all prosecution proceedings from their

inception. Durham v. United States, 401 U.S. 481, 483 (1971); United States v, Asset, 990 F.2d 208,

211 (5

th Cir. 1992) (death of defendant before entry of judgment abates prosecution ab initio); United

States v. Oberlin, 718 F.2d 894, 896 (9

th Cir. 1983) (similar holding); cf. United States v. Pogue, 19

F.3d 663 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (death pending direct appeal abates prosecution); Howell v. United States,

445 A.2d 1371, 1373 (D.C. 1983) (quoting Howell).

In light of the apparent recent death of defendant and in anticipation of the resulting joint

motion for abatement of prosecution, the parties request that the Court stay the need for either party

to file any pleadings that are coming due for a response in the interim. Furthermore, defense counsel

requests that he be authorized to contact the defendant’s family and representatives of her Estate in

Case 1:07-cr-00046-JR Document 312 Filed 05/02/2008 Page 1 of 2

2

connection with matters related to the criminal and civil forfeiture proceedings before the Court. The

United States does not object to defense counsel’s request.

Respectfully submitted,

JEFFREY A. TAYLOR

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

DC Bar No. 498610

/ s /

Daniel P. Butler

DC Bar No. 417178

Catherine K. Connelly

Mass. Bar No. 649430

William R. Cowden

DC Bar No. 426401

Assistant United States Attorneys

555 4th Street, N.W.

(202) 353-9431, 616-3384

Washington, D.C. 20530

Daniel.Butler@usdoj.gov

Catherine.Connelly2@usdoj.gov

William.Cowden@usdoj.gov

/ s /

______________________________________

Preston Burton, Esq., D.C. Bar No. 426378

ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFF, LLP

1152 15

th St., NW

Washington, D.C. 20005

(202) 339-8400

See also:

'D.C. Madam' apologized to mom, sister in suicide notes

By MITCH STACY – 2 hours ago

TAMPA, Fla. (AP) — The woman known as the "D.C. Madam" apologized to her mother and sister in suicide notes, saying she couldn't bear going to prison and saw killing herself as the only "exit strategy."

Deborah Jeane Palfrey, convicted last month of running an elite Washington prostitution ring, wrote to her mother that she could not "live the next 6-8 years behind bars for what you and I have come to regard as this 'modern day lynching,' only to come out of prison in my late '50s a broken, penniless and very much alone woman."

The notes were released by police Monday.

Palfrey, 52, hanged herself with a nylon rope Thursday in a shed outside her mother's mobile home in the Florida Gulf Coast community of Tarpon Springs, northwest of Tampa. Her mother, 76-year-old Blanche Palfrey, discovered the body.

Deborah Palfrey was convicted of running a prostitution service that catered to members of Washington's political elite, including Sen. David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican. She denied her escort service engaged in prostitution, saying that if any of the women engaged in sex acts for money, they did so without her knowledge.

She was free while she awaited sentencing on July 24 and had been staying with her mother.

Her suicide appeared to have been planned for days. The note to her mother was dated April 25, nearly a week before she killed herself. Police said the notes were found on a night stand in the bedroom where she'd been staying. One of the notes said, "Do not revive. Do not feed under any circumstances."

In the note to her younger sister, Bobbie, Palfrey expressed her love and told her to "be strong for mom."

"Also, you must comprehend that there was no other way out, i.e., 'exit strategy,' other than the one I have chosen here," she wrote. "Know I am at peace, with complete certainty, I believe Dad is standing watch — prepared to guide me into the light."

Also Monday, police announced that the medical examiner's office officially ruled Palfrey's death a suicide by hanging. A toxicology report is pending.

Her death last week had sparked widespread Internet chatter among those who speculated that someone killed her to keep her from identifying more prominent clients of the escort service.

"Tarpon Springs Police Department detectives, after following up on several investigative avenues have not discovered any new evidence which would indicate anything other than a suicide by hanging in this case," spokesman Capt. Jeffrey Young said.

Palfrey's mother and sister identified her handwriting in the suicide notes, Young said.

A federal jury convicted Palfrey on April 15 of money laundering, using the mail for illegal purposes and racketeering. Prosecutors said she ran the prostitution service for 13 years. The trial concluded without revealing many new details about the service or its clients. Vitter was among possible witnesses but did not take the stand.

Palfrey had vowed that she would not go to prison, even telling a Washington writer that she would commit suicide first.