It is now clear that unless the DOJ is able to successfully appeal yesterday's ruling it seems that the 20th hijacker will not be executed. Whether you support the death penalty or not what happened in this case should trouble you. It appears one of the government lawyers coached witnesses by giving them information about what others would be testifying to, in order to avoid any potential contradiction. Now, of course lawyers should strive to make sure that witnesses don't contradict other witnesses - however, they are not allowed to coach witnesses in how to answer questions.
Based on my own, limited legal experience it seems like in real life witness coaching happens - but is usually quite limited, ensuring the integrity of the legal process. Lawyers may meet with witnesses, show them previous deposition transcripts, etc - and worn them of potential dangerous areas. That's normal, and is probably even helpful to ensuring that the adjudicative process produces a coherent story (always a plus, right). In this case, however, there was a order from a judge that prohibited this type of behavior. The government lawyer in question decided that the order did not apply to her.
The sad thing here is that this will all get blamed on the Bush DOJ, and its not their fault. They treid to comply with the order. Heck, lets be honest, they didn't have to cheat to get this guy the needle. Instead, it was a lawyer in a different government agency (the FAA) that decided to "take initiative." I can't help but feel that this is all a result of "we-must-win-at-all-cost" philosophy. The guy is a terrorist, we should kill terrorist, rules and procedures - these are unnecessary.
That lawyers in government (particularly those that are not career prosecutors - who are socialized by their years of experience hunting criminals, and learn to play by the role) hold this view - that's not surprising. Look at their bosses. You have Dick Chaney who seems to think that the President is some sort of a demi-g-d and you have Bill Frist, who can't seem to understand that public debate makes us stronger, not weaker. More on this later.
Based on my own, limited legal experience it seems like in real life witness coaching happens - but is usually quite limited, ensuring the integrity of the legal process. Lawyers may meet with witnesses, show them previous deposition transcripts, etc - and worn them of potential dangerous areas. That's normal, and is probably even helpful to ensuring that the adjudicative process produces a coherent story (always a plus, right). In this case, however, there was a order from a judge that prohibited this type of behavior. The government lawyer in question decided that the order did not apply to her.
The sad thing here is that this will all get blamed on the Bush DOJ, and its not their fault. They treid to comply with the order. Heck, lets be honest, they didn't have to cheat to get this guy the needle. Instead, it was a lawyer in a different government agency (the FAA) that decided to "take initiative." I can't help but feel that this is all a result of "we-must-win-at-all-cost" philosophy. The guy is a terrorist, we should kill terrorist, rules and procedures - these are unnecessary.
That lawyers in government (particularly those that are not career prosecutors - who are socialized by their years of experience hunting criminals, and learn to play by the role) hold this view - that's not surprising. Look at their bosses. You have Dick Chaney who seems to think that the President is some sort of a demi-g-d and you have Bill Frist, who can't seem to understand that public debate makes us stronger, not weaker. More on this later.
posted by Ilya Ehrenburg at 10:18 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home