Justice Department Files Motion to Drop Case Against Former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens

[WillowTree]

The U.S. Justice Department filed a motion Wednesday to drop its case against former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, who was convicted of seven felony counts of corruption last fall.

Attorney General Eric Holder decided to abandon the case due to prosecutorial misconduct, Justice Department sources told FOX News.

Stevens was convicted last year of lying on a Senate disclosure form in order to hide $250,000 in gifts he received from an oil company executive and friends.

Only after the conviction did allegations of FBI misconduct come to light. The judge in the case has repeatedly delayed sentencing Stevens, and at one point he held prosecutors in contempt.

Justice Department officials later replaced the trial team. Stevens sought to dismiss the case, and Wednesday's action in effect supports his request.

"After careful review, I have concluded that certain information should have been provided to the defense for use at trial. 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," Holder said in a statement released shortly after the motion was filed Wednesday.





Justice Department Files Motion to Drop Case Against Former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens - Presidential Politics | Political News - FOXNews.com

 

[editec]

No kidding?

Wow, poltical corruption pays after all.

Who knew?

Besides every one of us, I mean.

 

[WillowTree]

No kidding?

Wow, poltical corruption pays after all.

Who knew?

Besides every one of us, I mean.

funny! when he was being tried you "just knew he was guilty" didn't ya? I bet it breaks your heart to find out he wasn't treated fairly.. and yes, kudos to Holder.

 

[Yurt]

No kidding?

Wow, poltical corruption pays after all.

Who knew?

Besides every one of us, I mean.

who says he was corrupt? they WITHHELD evidence....that evidence likely would prove his innocence, hence why they withheld it...it was a political witchhunt...

maybe that should be investigated, maybe that is why bush fired the others

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You actually expect Editec or any other Liberal to admit that they were wrong? Maybe if Hell Freezes over. You see he is already spinning it as somehow the Obama Justice department is now in on the supposed corruption.

 

[sealybobo]

No kidding?

Wow, poltical corruption pays after all.

Who knew?

Besides every one of us, I mean.

funny! when he was being tried you "just knew he was guilty" didn't ya? I bet it breaks your heart to find out he wasn't treated fairly.. and yes, kudos to Holder.

You are rediculous.

But hey, whatever, at least the guy lost his seat.

Too bad he can't get his seat back. Now it is in Democratic hands. Prays Jesus.

 

[jillian]

No kidding?

Wow, poltical corruption pays after all.

Who knew?

Besides every one of us, I mean.

who says he was corrupt? they WITHHELD evidence....that evidence likely would prove his innocence, hence why they withheld it...it was a political witchhunt...

maybe that should be investigated, maybe that is why bush fired the others

it proves that the prosecutors were overzealous and mishandled the case.... stupid because they probably had enough without being dishonest.

And no... Bush's firing of the AG's had nothing to do with this... it had to do with them refusing to do a witchhunt on Dems and certainly has nothing to do with prosecution of a fellow repub. so let's not get confused here.

If there was misconduct, as their apparently was, then Holder did the right thing. Why aren't you singing Obama's guy's praises?

 

[WillowTree]

No kidding?

Wow, poltical corruption pays after all.

Who knew?

Besides every one of us, I mean.

funny! when he was being tried you "just knew he was guilty" didn't ya? I bet it breaks your heart to find out he wasn't treated fairly.. and yes, kudos to Holder.

You are rediculous. Can't be, don't even know what that is! What is it?

But hey, whatever, at least the guy lost his seat. Nice work! I alwasys said there isn't any low that's too low for a Democrat to go.

Too bad he can't get his seat back. Now it is in Democratic hands. Prays Jesus.

I know, our country is so screwed in Democratic hands.




It will take a lot of

 

[AllieBaba]

No kidding?

Wow, poltical corruption pays after all.

Who knew?

Besides every one of us, I mean.

funny! when he was being tried you "just knew he was guilty" didn't ya? I bet it breaks your heart to find out he wasn't treated fairly.. and yes, kudos to Holder.

You are rediculous.

But hey, whatever, at least the guy lost his seat.

Too bad he can't get his seat back. Now it is in Democratic hands. Prays Jesus.

Classic. "The end justifies the means".

Thank you for exemplifying every single bad thing that has ever been said about Dems the world over. Including their assumption that it's okay if they break the law, if that's what it takes to force themselves upon an unwelcoming public.

 

[WillowTree]

"After careful review, I have concluded that certain information should have been provided to the defense for use at trial. 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," Holder said in a statement released shortly after the motion was filed Wednesday.




This translates to "not guilty" and this guy was railroaded with trumped up shit! That's what it amounts to.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No kidding?

Wow, poltical corruption pays after all.

Who knew?

Besides every one of us, I mean.

who says he was corrupt? they WITHHELD evidence....that evidence likely would prove his innocence, hence why they withheld it...it was a political witchhunt...

maybe that should be investigated, maybe that is why bush fired the others

it proves that the prosecutors were overzealous and mishandled the case.... stupid because they probably had enough without being dishonest.

And no... Bush's firing of the AG's had nothing to do with this... it had to do with them refusing to do a witchhunt on Dems and certainly has nothing to do with prosecution of a fellow repub. so let's not get confused here.

If there was misconduct, as their apparently was, then Holder did the right thing. Why aren't you singing Obama's guy's praises?

Doesn't mesh with the dismissal. If they had withheld information it would have to be something to put their case in trouble. Otherwise they would NOT have withheld it. Further all they would now have to do is disclose the information and retry the case with the defense now knowing the information.

 

[Sinatra]

This is actually a far more significant development than is currently being reported in the mainstream media.

The implications here regarding an overtly politically motivated witchhunt are significant.

While no fan of Stevens, his treatment was far more aggressive than say that given Charlie Rangel, or Chris Dodd - both of whom have significant legal baggage of their own.

The under reporting by the media regarding Rangel's alleged misdeeds is sickening.

It remains to be seen if any actual investigative reporting takes place regarding Dodd - who might prove even more potentially corrupt than Rangel - no easy task.

 

[AllieBaba]

Hey, but remember..THERE IS NO LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS.

This is why I have withdrawn to the outback and disconnected the cable and the phone, I swear to God. It's nauseating.

 

[Hunterlib1]

This is actually a far more significant development than is currently being reported in the mainstream media.

The implications here regarding an overtly politically motivated witchhunt are significant.

While no fan of Stevens, his treatment was far more aggressive than say that given Charlie Rangel, or Chris Dodd - both of whom have significant legal baggage of their own.

The under reporting by the media regarding Rangel's alleged misdeeds is sickening.

It remains to be seen if any actual investigative reporting takes place regarding Dodd - who might prove even more potentially corrupt than Rangel - no easy task.

Indeed. The treatment of Stevens was absurd with the refs to the "bridge to nowhere" being thrown about as if the man was the epitome of corruption. Can he get his seat back and does he want it? Doubts here. The prosecution should and may come under the same (prosecution) for this miscarriage of justice due to the lack of disclosure of exculpatory evidence.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

This is actually a far more significant development than is currently being reported in the mainstream media.

The implications here regarding an overtly politically motivated witchhunt are significant.

While no fan of Stevens, his treatment was far more aggressive than say that given Charlie Rangel, or Chris Dodd - both of whom have significant legal baggage of their own.

The under reporting by the media regarding Rangel's alleged misdeeds is sickening.

It remains to be seen if any actual investigative reporting takes place regarding Dodd - who might prove even more potentially corrupt than Rangel - no easy task.

Indeed. The treatment of Stevens was absurd with the refs to the "bridge to nowhere" being thrown about as if the man was the epitome of corruption. Can he get his seat back and does he want it? Doubts here. The prosecution should and may come under the same (prosecution) for this miscarriage of justice due to the lack of disclosure of exculpatory evidence.

Nothing will happen to the Federal prosecutor at all. He did what the Dems wanted, shoveled enough dirt on Stevens to make him lose the election. ANd as we see here the Liberals are JUST fine with that. As long as the wrongs hurt a republican, no problem at all.

 

[Jerry]

You poor pitiful folks. Don't any of you know that it was the Bush Justice Deptartment that went after Stevens?

 

[Xenophon]

He's still a pork lovin douchebag.

 

[Yurt]

No kidding?

Wow, poltical corruption pays after all.

Who knew?

Besides every one of us, I mean.

who says he was corrupt? they WITHHELD evidence....that evidence likely would prove his innocence, hence why they withheld it...it was a political witchhunt...

maybe that should be investigated, maybe that is why bush fired the others

it proves that the prosecutors were overzealous and mishandled the case.... stupid because they probably had enough without being dishonest.

And no... Bush's firing of the AG's had nothing to do with this... it had to do with them refusing to do a witchhunt on Dems and certainly has nothing to do with prosecution of a fellow repub. so let's not get confused here.

If there was misconduct, as their apparently was, then Holder did the right thing. Why aren't you singing Obama's guy's praises?

you're confused...you're so biased that you can't even see that the prosecutors withholding information is more probable to prove his innocence than not....and they "probably" had enough...meadowmuffins, i'm sure if he was dem you would say otherwise ms. partisan...

bush's ag's had everythign to do with this...you libs all claimed bush fired people solely for politics, obviously NOT as he kept some on who went after a republican "over zealously" as you put it...

why should i sing obama's guy praises? the case was on appeal and if holder did nothing and knew about the misconduct he could also get in trouble, more likely a case of CYA ms. partisan

 

[foggedinn]

He's still a pork lovin douchebag.

No, he was just bringing home the bacon.

I really don't believe it has anything to do with dem/rep. It's a prosecutor thing. Prosecutors want to win. The less information they give to the defense before trial, the more likely that the prosecution will prevail.

Something very similar seems to be happening locally with Biloxi mayor Warr. The judge keeps ordering the prosecutor to turn over information to the defense, and the prosecutor keeps stonewalling both the judge and the defense team. The prosecutor actually came out and said that if the information is given to the defense, the defense will then know the prosecutors theory of the alleged crime. The prosecutor wants to engage in ambush prosecution. I'm just suprised that he admitted it.