Former Sen. Stevens (R-AK) Conviction Overturned

Bunz

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
3,215
Location
Alaska
Frankly I am stunned. I dont have time right now to go much more in depth. But I thought some discussion might come out of this one.


There is more of the story at the link that I didnt copy and paste.
http://www.adn.com/news/politics/fbi/stevens/story/743906.html
WASHINGTON -- The Justice Department has moved to dismiss former Sen. Ted Stevens' indictment, effectively voiding his Oct. 27 conviction on seven counts of filing false statements on his U.S. Senate financial disclosure forms.

"After careful review, I have concluded that certain information should have been provided to the defense for use at trial," Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement released this morning. "In light of this conclusion, and in consideration of the totality of the circumstances of this particular case, I have determined that it is in the interest of justice to dismiss the indictment and not proceed with a new trial."

The Justice Department filed its motion to dismiss the case this morning.

Stevens, who is 85, lost his re-election bid in November to the former Anchorage Mayor, Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska.


Since Stevens' conviction, the former Alaska senator's lawyers have filed several motions to outright dismiss his original indictment or to grant Stevens a new trial. Their motions have been based in part on allegations in a whistle-blower complaint by an Anchorage FBI agent, and other allegations of prosecutorial misconduct that were released after Stevens' conviction.

But the decision to dismiss the case appears to be based on a matter that came up during the trial: a discrepancy in the courtroom statements of the star witness, Bill Allen, the former oil services company CEO who plied Stevens with gifts, including home renovations that doubled the size of the Alaska senator's residence.

The Justice Department recently discovered notes from an April 15 interview prosecutors conducted with Allen, wrote Paul O'Brien, who has been handling post-conviction matters in the case since some members of the original trial team were cited by a judge with contempt for turning over documents.

In the interview, Allen was asked about a 2002 note Stevens sent him, thanking Allen for his work on "the chalet," his home in Alaska.

In the note, Stevens told Allen not to be "P.O.'d," but said that he needed to have a conversation with one of Stevens' neighbors in Girdwood, Bob Persons, a close friend of both who helped oversee the renovation of the senator's home. It "has to be done right," Stevens wrote.

"You owe me a bill," the letter from Stevens said. "Remember Torricelli, my friend. Friendship is one thing, compliance with the ethics rules entirely different."

Allen said on the witness stand he was unaware at the time what Stevens meant by "Torricelli." But Stevens was apparently referring to former Sen. Robert Torricelli, D-N.J., who in 2002 was investigated by the Justice Department for accepting improper gifts from a donor. The investigation closed, but the Senate Ethics Committee reviewed the Justice Department files and issued a public letter of admonishment to Torricelli, who then abandoned a re-election bid and left the Senate.

Allen testified that he didn't send Stevens a bill or invoice after the note, but as promised in the letter, he did have a conversation with Persons. Allen testified that Persons told him, "Don't worry about getting a bill, Ted's just covering his ass."
 
Werbung:
This is strange.

All evidence I've seen, indicates that Stevens DID take gifts, did violate ethics rules, etc., and deserved what he got. So why are they dropping all charges?

It could be that the Democrats, having the guy out of office and gaining a Dem seat in the Senate, have everything they wanted, and have no interest in pursuing actual justice.
 
Did you read the article? The prosecution under the Bush Administration screwed up, didnt provide all the disclosure documents and this is how we find ourselves.

Heck, even when asked for a pardon, Bush refused, and he knew, or at least the justice department knew there was some fishy stuff that went on.

As for if he actually took illegal gifts? Yeah probably, but again the prosecution bumbled.

The thing that gets me really, is the guy who bribed all of these people, still hasnt been sentenced, now nearly 3 years later. He(Bill Allen) had been buying legislators for decades, and when he found himself in hot water for other reasons(it is alleged his son was a drug kingpin or sorts and that Bill Allen was about to be brought down over some sort of underage sexual misconduct) which triggered this whole ugly scene with 5 state legs convicted and at least one more awaiting trial, and then this conviction that has been thrown out.
 
I had a sinking suspicion the entire deal was political in nature. During an election year, when things suddenly pop into the national media, you can almost count on the fact it's all political.
 
I had a sinking suspicion the entire deal was political in nature. During an election year, when things suddenly pop into the national media, you can almost count on the fact it's all political.

Apparently you didn't read the article, so how about we go over the relevant portion again?

"After careful review, I have concluded that certain information should have been provided to the defense for use at trial," Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement released this morning. "In light of this conclusion, and in consideration of the totality of the circumstances of this particular case, I have determined that it is in the interest of justice to dismiss the indictment and not proceed with a new trial."
Got it now?...good. You know, you really ought to give Faux News and the CTs a rest
 
I had a sinking suspicion the entire deal was political in nature. During an election year, when things suddenly pop into the national media, you can almost count on the fact it's all political.
No doubt.

The Gonzales Years are OVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We've got a REAL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, AGAIN!!!!

"Yesterday, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced that he had had enough. The Justice Department asked U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan to drop the case after learning that prosecutors had failed to turn over notes that contradicted testimony from their key witness."
 
Apparently you didn't read the article, so how about we go over the relevant portion again?


Got it now?...good. You know, you really ought to give Faux News and the CTs a rest

Well, that was my point. The relevant information wasn't provided. Why? Because it was an election year, and people were playing politics with the trial. It happens all the time.

Of course AFTER the person in question is removed, or loses the election, THEN they drop the charges because they know they'll lose on appeal, and look really bad when the information comes out.
 
Werbung:
Back
Top