Rove Subpoenaed By Libby’s Defense Team

Michael Isikoff reports in Newsweek Magazine that Karl Rove, among others, has been sunoenaed to testify by Scooter Libby’s lawyers in the former White House aide’s perjury and obstruction of jusitce trial. Most of Isikoff’s report is the typical breathless, worhtless reportage that has characterized the case. An example is Isikoff’s repetition of the oft repeated, and throughly debunked, notion that the disclosure of Valerie Plame’s identity was possibly unlawful because she was employed by the CIA’s Directorate of Operations and her identity was thus classified. Mr. Isikoff is presumably a smart guy. He should know by now – and perhaps he does, but just doesn’t care – that there was no substantive crime committed here. If there was, there surely would have been indictments. Libby is charged with derivative crimes. Where’s the beef, Mr. Isikoff. In any event, the interesting bit is that Libby may compel Rove and other White House honchos to testify on his behalf. It certainly will be interesting to hear what Rove might say, especially in light of Ted Wells’ opening statement, in which he essentially argued that Libby was made a fall guy to protect Rove. Interesting indeed.

Why Mandatory Minimum Sentences are EVIL

ESPN the Magazine, not normally known for its coverage of things legal brings us this outrageous story of a high school honor student and sports star now doing 10 years on a conviction for “aggravated child molestation.” Seems the young man was stupid enough to receive oral sex at a party from a girl, who everyone agrees initiated the encounter, who was just 2 years younger thna he was, but still a year under the age of consent. Under Georgia law, if the boy and girl had had intercourse, he’d have been charged with a misdemeanor. For some odd, stupid reason, the act of oral sex qualified him for the child mloestation charge (evidently the state legislature re-wrote the law, but refused to apply it retroactively). For some reason of politics or pure spite, the prosecutors chose to charge and prosecute an offense that they knew did not fit the facts. So much for justice. Let Genarlow Wilson pay the price for some pathetic prosecutor’s political ambitions.

What’s Up With the Supreme Court and Sentencing Guidelines?

Emily Bazelon, with whom I usually disagree, and usually vehemently, has this very interesting article posted on Slate in which she discusses the Supreme Court’s recent Cunningham decision, in which the Court struck down California’s criminal sentencing guidelines. Emily discusses the somewhat peculiar alliances at work in the case (Scalia and Thomas, joined by Chief Justice Roberts, voting to strike the guidelines down, while Justice Alito a former federal prosecutor and Justice Kennedy voting with the liberal block to uphold the guidelines), the Court’s recent sentencing jurisprudence, such as it is, and what might be ahead in this area of the law.

More Charges for Nifong, Indeed

News outlets are reporting that the North Carolina Bar has filed additional charges against Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifongbased upon his deliberate withholding of exculpatory DNA test results from the defense in the Duke rape case (see my earlier post on the possibility that these additionalo charges would be filed here). Mr. Nifong appears to be in truly deep doo doo. It is fact that prosecutors engage in ethically borderline behavior in almost every case, routinely withholding from defense attorneys information that is useful to the defense. But Nifong’s conduct, in its totality, is especially egregious. He compounded his misconduct by blatantly lying to the press and to the court, claiming that he had turned over all discoverable material, when he knew that he had not dine so. Some will say that this kind of behavior happens all the time. I think that those who say that are right. But Nifong got caught and should be punished. Disbarment would be appropriate.

Opening Statements in the Libby Case

Opening statements in Scooter Libby’s trial on perjury and obstruction of justice charges were today. Law.com’s story can be found here. As I have said before, this is a prosecution that should never have been brought. Libby is charged with lying about underlying acts that were not charged as crimes. Patrick Fitzgerald is simply wasting time and taxpayer dollars. Big surprise.

Ken Lammers to Shut Down Crimlaw

So I just learned that Ken Lammers has shut down his CrimLaw Blog (apparently the post in which Ken announced this decision was dated December 22, 2006 – goes to show you how slow I can be to pick up on such things. Ah, the demands of practice). This is a huge disappointment to me. I have been reading Ken’s blog for some time, and was a (sporadic) guest blogger there for a spell. I will miss the blog, and wish Ken well.

Lawyer Accused of Running Escort Service Posts Bail

According to the New York Sun the New Jersey defense lawyer charged with a variety of offenses arising out of his alleged operation of an escort service (which, it is claimed, he took over running for a client after the client went to prison) was freed Thursday after posting bail in the amount of $1 million. Setting aside my concerns about the merits of the case for a moment – and they are legion – even the bail seems excessive. $1 million?? You’d think Paul Bergrin, the defendant, had committed a violent crime, or that he was some other sort of real criminal. I just simply do not understand why prosecutors get so jacked up by these call girl cases (well, actually, I do understand, but I think that the reasons are stupid).

Nifong Is Not the Only Prosecutor Wearing Jackboots in NC

Evidently there really is something in the water in North Carolina. The Cato Institute provides this rather appalling example of prosecutorial misconduct in the Tar Heel state of the sort that would indeed make Mr. Nifong proud.

Hat tip: Crime & Federalism blog.

Nifong’s Replacement Is No Prize

This past Friday’s Raleigh News and Observer contained a troubling article about James Coman, the special prosecutor appointed to take Mike Nifong’s place on the Duke rape case. If the article is to be bedlieved – and I have absolutely no reason to question the facts set forth in the article – Mr. Coman would appear to have the same admirable devotion to truth and justice as our friend Mr. Nifong. Must be some kind of a chip that they implant in these guys’ brains when they become prosecutors that makes them want to ignore the truth, and the law, in the pursuit of convictions.

Is the Libby Case a Personal Vendetta?

An editorial in the weekend edition of The Wall Street Journal doesn’t come out and say as much, but makes a strong case that such might be the case. Read the piece, and judge for yourself. For what it’s worth, it has always struck me as odd that Patrick Fitzgerald would spend time and money to prosecute a perjury case where the guy indicted was supposedly lying about something he didn’t do in the first place, that the prosecutor knew someone else had actually done, and that wasn’t a crime anyway (and that the prosecutor knew wasn’t a crime). I would suggest that Jonathan Turley, who described the Libby case as a “modest case against a hapless guy” was perhaps being generous to the prosecutor. Very odd indeed.