You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: WoT
U.S. Seeks Reversal of Moussaoui Ruling
2006-03-16
ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) - Prosecutors asked a judge Wednesday to reconsider her decision to toss out half of the government's case against confessed terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui. They acknowledged that altering the judge's ruling is their only hope of salvaging the death-penalty case.
Ain't gonna happen. Mookie is going to end up with life in prison.
In a motion filed with U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema, prosecutors said the aviation security evidence she barred because a government lawyer coached the witnesses ``goes to the very core of our theory of the case.''

At the very least, the prosecutors argued they should be allowed to present a newly designated aviation security witness who had no contact with the offending lawyer, Carla J. Martin of the Transportation Security Administration. They said this would ``allow us to present our complete theory of the case, albeit in imperfect form.'' ``The public has a strong interest in seeing and hearing it (aviation security evidence), and the court should not eliminate it from the case, particularly not ... where other remedies are available,'' they wrote Brinkema.
Perhaps they should have taken care not to violate the judge's rules and the federal code of procedure. Just a thought when you're getting ready to argue a really important case.
There was no immediate response from the judge, but she had indicated late Tuesday that she had time available Thursday to consider such a motion if it were made.

The sentencing trial that began last week will determine whether he is executed or spends life in prison without possibility of release. Brinkema has delayed the trial until Monday while prosecutors appeal.

Prosecutors argued the sanctions imposed Tuesday were unnecessarily severe. The judge barred several key witnesses from testifying as punishment for the government's misconduct. Brinkema's sanctions make it ``impossible for us to present our theory of the case to the jury,'' the prosecutors said, adding that the barred testimony ``is one of the two essential and interconnected components of our case.''

They also emphasized that six witnesses improperly coached by Martin testified at an evidentiary hearing Tuesday that their testimony would not be influenced by her actions.
Horseshit. Of course they'll be influenced, and if their testimony is allowed the defense a near sure-fire winner on appeal. Then we get to do this all over again.
The aviation security evidence was one of two parts of the prosecution's case: offensive and defensive measures they argue the government would have taken if Moussaoui had not lied to FBI agents about his terrorist connections when arrested in Minnesota three weeks before al-Qaida's attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

They say these measures combined would have prevented at least one death that day on which nearly 3,000 were killed as three hijacked jetliners were flown into the buildings and a fourth crashed in a field in Pennsylvania. This is crucial to the government case because to get a death penalty prosecutors must show an action of Moussaoui's - his lies, in this case - led directly to at least one death on 9/11.
This presumes that the government would have acted sprightly upon hearing the pearls of wisdom from Mookie's lips. We all know better. He could have given them dates, names and locations and nothing would have happened. And to presume that the FAA would have done anything at all is to stand up in court and sound stooopid.
Prosecutors remain free to enter the offensive steps they believe the FBI would have taken in those three weeks to locate 9/11 hijackers in this country. But Brinkema barred them from presenting witnesses or exhibits about what defensive steps federal aviation officials might have taken to enhance airport security during that period. She said Martin's misconduct while acting as liaison between prosecutors and seven prosecution and defense aviation witnesses had left that segment of the case ``irremediably contaminated.''

In their compromise proposal, prosecutors suggested they would drop efforts to argue the Federal Aviation Administration would have barred small knives, like those used by the hijackers, from planes and would have altered its terrorist screening profiles to catch the terrorists. Instead, they would call one witness, whom they did not identify, who worked at the FAA in August 2001 and could discuss the government's use of ``no-fly'' lists to bar specific, named terrorists from planes and how those lists evolved over the years.

Prosecutors have acknowledged they may have no viable case if Brinkema's ruling stands. ``We don't know whether it is worth us proceeding at all, candidly, under the ruling you made today,'' Assistant U.S. Attorney Rob Spencer said in an unusually blunt assessment during a conference call Tuesday. Spencer went on to say that resuming the trial under these conditions would ``waste the jury's time and the court's time, and we're all mindful of the expense of this proceeding.''
Yup. Put Mookie in jail for life and then fire Martin for her idiocy.
If Brinkema refuses to revise her ruling, it's not clear what appeal avenues remain open. Defense attorney Edward MacMahon said the government can't appeal Brinkema's ruling to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond now that the trial is under way. ``We don't think the government has any appellate rights under'' federal law, MacMahon said during Tuesday's conference call.

Martin coached witnesses on their testimony, sent them trial transcripts that she urged them to read and warned them to be prepared for certain topics on cross-examination. That violated trial rules preventing witnesses from being exposed to trial proceedings so that they do not alter their testimony based on what they learn. She also misrepresented to defense lawyers that witnesses they wanted to call weren't willing to talk with them before trial.
She should be disbarred for this, but my bet is she won't be punished at all.
Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, said prosecutors might ask the appeals court for a rarely used common law relief order called a writ of mandamus, but Tobias said such orders are granted only in extraordinary circumstances.

Eric Holder, a former deputy attorney general, said in an interview Wednesday he expected prosecutors to exhaust all options pursuing the case. ``Agree or disagree with the decision to seek death, once you have committed to that course of action, you have to do all that you can to obtain that ultimate punishment.''
Posted by:Steve White

#15  see? Disbarred for life
Posted by: Frank G   2006-03-16 22:46  

#14  Kewl! Thanks, DocJax!
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-03-16 22:33  

#13  Hah! An attorney friend called me up and asked if I recalled Carla. She represented the FAA in a relatives wrongful death case; and yes she cooked the wintesses then. An ATC present at the crash suddenly developed amnesia after a stairwell coaching session from dear Carla. That was 1998!
Posted by: DocJax   2006-03-16 21:37  

#12  A Clinton-appointed judge and a TSA (gummint careers for cretins) lawyer. A marriage made in heaven.
Posted by: SR-71   2006-03-16 14:55  

#11  Leonie Brinkema is Clinton appointee who tried to toss this case once before but failed. Maybe she'll get lucky this time.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2006-03-16 14:08  

#10  LOL, UB. You've sold me, too!
Posted by: Glert Thetch2165   2006-03-16 13:56  

#9  There seem to be some pros and cons of life vs. execution. Of course with execution, it is over, the message is sent, etc, and believe me I will not shed a tear (I'll have to try not to celebrate too long or loudly). Spending the rest of his miserable life in jail, hopefully with 23 1/2 hours per day in solitary would be a good punishment also. I fear he may do well in jail, convert many rudderless people to his way of thinking. OK, I convinced myself, hang the bastard.
Posted by: Unique Battle   2006-03-16 13:38  

#8  Carla J. Martin : whattanidiot!!!!
Posted by: bk   2006-03-16 13:11  

#7  I've had experience in the Federal courts. It did not reduce my cynicism.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-03-16 12:35  

#6  What makes you think it is only in cases of noteriety that such practices occur? Far more likely is that this is the way the government attorneys behave all the time and it is only in cases of noteriety that there is a sufficiently high profile for anybody to care.

Fear not, NS, such a cynical surmise occured to me as well. Somehow, I managed to retain an iota of optimism that hoped the Feds would carefully screen participants in this incredibly high profile case, Silly me, I'll get over it.
Posted by: Zenster   2006-03-16 12:30  

#5  I vote we drop a dime on Moussaoui while he is in the custody of the judicial.
snicker !

He's dead, Jim.
Posted by: wxjames   2006-03-16 12:10  

#4  I wonder how much money there is in offering to throw a case to the other side.
Posted by: Phil   2006-03-16 11:35  

#3  She's been placed on administrative leave.

Did she have no oversight from her bosses at TSA or input from Justice? They should all be put on leave as well
Posted by: Seafarious   2006-03-16 11:33  

#2  What is it about cases of noteriety that summon forth the utmost in incompetence from participating individuals?

What makes you think it is only in cases of noteriety that such practices occur? Far more likely is that this is the way the government attorneys behave all the time and it is only in cases of noteriety that there is a sufficiently high profile for anybody to care.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-03-16 11:07  

#1  Martin coached witnesses on their testimony, sent them trial transcripts that she urged them to read and warned them to be prepared for certain topics on cross-examination. That violated trial rules preventing witnesses from being exposed to trial proceedings so that they do not alter their testimony based on what they learn. She also misrepresented to defense lawyers that witnesses they wanted to call weren't willing to talk with them before trial.

Isn't that a direct violation of elementary discovery rules? Why hasn't Martin's license to practice law been suspended pending permanent revocation? Honestly, what more does it take? There should have been immediate censure and institution of proceedings to disbar. I can hear Johnny Cochran smirking from his grave. What is it about cases of noteriety that summon forth the utmost in incompetence from participating individuals? I'm sure that, in a break from doggedly pursuing his wife's killer 24/7, somewhere out on a golf course, OJ is applauding.
Posted by: Zenster   2006-03-16 11:04  

00:00