From Politico.com comes this article about prosecutorial misconduct by Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys. Judge Emmet Sullivan, the judge who threw out the conviction of former Alaska Senater Ted Stevens, sums it up this way;
"In several cases recently, this court has seen troubling failures to produce exculpatory evidence," the judge said, referring to evidence that could help a defendant or otherwise undercut the government's case. “Whether you’re a public official, a private citizen or a Guantanamo detainee, the prosecution must provide exculpatory evidence...This is not about prosecution by any means necessary."
The article cites cases in addition to the Stevens' case that raise concerns. After reading this article I have to wonder: What is the probability that Patrick Fitzgerald, our local hard charging US Attorney, has stepped beyond the bounds of propriety in his pursuit of political corruption? I don't ask this because I want to see him fail. On the contrary, these investigations are important, and I would be appalled if they are kicked to the curb on a technicality. If I was Blago's legal eagle I'd sure be sniffing around for a basis to claim just that. If I was Fitzgerald I'd be making sure all of my work passes the judicial and constitutional sniff test.