|
|
THE 10 WORST PROSECUTORS
IN THE United States
- 2008-
The ten worst prosecuting attorneys in the United States for the year 2008
are finally here! After several nominations and recommendations from
interested readers around the country, combined with ample amounts of time
used to examine each prosecutor, the list has finally been narrowed down to
the ten most deserving nominees. This year’s list includes several
new nominees along with a few old ones. Added to this list are two
prosecutors not quite worthy of the top ten but will be receiving honorable
mention.
Unfortunately, over the past year not much has changed in the Department of
Justice. Even with Alberto Gonzales no longer in the picture as the United
States Attorney General, his effect is still there to be seen and felt. It
seems as though the worst of his political manipulations and illegal
activities are just beginning to unravel. Even after cleaning house in the
Justice Department by bringing in new leadership that has expressed their
commitment to heal the wounds left behind by some, little has been done to
make sure that the Department will get headed in the right direction.
Prosecutors from around the country with extreme political affiliations
connected to their communities, the Justice Department, and perhaps all the
way to the White House have damaged the image of justice in America.
The dedication of conservative power houses such as George W. Bush, Karl
Rove, Monica Goodling, and Alberto Gonzales asserting their will and
influence upon the judicial system has become extremely disturbing when
taken into consideration the ways in which those tasks have been
implemented with the undoing of the Constitution. It is the hope of this
firm that justice is done for all Americans who have become victims of the
acts committed by these troublesome prosecutors. It is further hoped that
President-elect Obama and his new nominated U.S. Attorney General, Eric
Holder, will set a new tone at the Department of Justice. So without
further adieu, the Ten Worst Prosecutors of 2008 are:
Alberto Gonzales/ Former U.S.
Attorney General - (Update):
The former Attorney General now refers to himself as a “Dillusioned Republican” because of his testy
relationship with George W. Bush, which he would like to distance himself
from as much as possible. At the time of our second year, Alberto Gonzales
has failed to interest any law firms in hiring him anywhere in the United States.
Gonzales has had no full time job since his resignation. This is very
abnormal as ex-U.S. Attorney Generals are typically highly sought after. He
claims that his current “occupation” is an advisor to homeland
security and border issues for a global consulting firm. Speaking
engagements at major organizations and Universities is what he currently
involves himself in the most. He is receiving as much money doing public
speaking as he did when he was Attorney General of the U.S., which
totaled around $191,000. He averages $30,000 per visit at Universities when
asked to speak on campus, but he certainly earns that with the hecklers and
protestors that show up.
Michael Mukasey, Gonzales’ replacement, is
allegedly dedicated to keeping politics out of the Justice Department which
is something Gonzales obviously was never able to do. Mukasey
has also gone out of his way to help specific departments such as the Civil
Rights Department. But Mukasey still lands on the
back end of much negative criticism that has carried over from the Gonzales
era. We hope that no more damage will be done in the next month.
Former Justice Department officials working under Alberto Gonzales have
been accused of breaking the law by letting the Bush Administration’s
politics dictate the hiring of prosecutors, immigration judges, and other
career government lawyers. The official in charge of the interviews for
hires was Monica Goodling who was Gonzales’ Chief Counselor and White
House Liaison. Goodling would question applicants on views about abortion,
gay marriage, and convict sentencing. Goodling made habits of avoiding any
hire that seemed to lean to the liberal left of the Democratic Party. One
man in particular was noted for attending a very Republican school but
scored badly on God, gays, guns, and convicts. Screening such as this
created massive backlog for immigration courts since so many judgeships
were empty from the delayed interview process. One man was even
disqualified because of his wife’s politics. None of the accused
participants who worked under Gonzales currently work for the Justice
Department anymore; therefore they avoid any departmental penalties. Senior
Republicans have stated that there is no offense in this case that would
warrant criminal charges. There is even some disagreement amongst Democrats
as to whether or not a perjury charge would be warranted, though there is a
large outcry for those charges coming from progressives. This type of
interview screening is banned under the Civil Service Law and the Justice
Department’s internal policies. Also, sworn testimonies of the
accused have extremely contradicted one another. New Attorney General Michael
Mukasey’s response was disgracefully
lukewarm to this problem within the Department of Justice. Legislation is
currently in the works to make sure that politicizing of the hiring of
government officials does not happen again in the future thanks to several
Democratic Congressmen. In summary, still bad news for Gonzales and the
specter of a Texas Disbarment proceeding is also a possibility.
Congratulations to the former A.G. for being a repeat nominee.
Charles Sebesta/
Former Burleson County, Texas DA - (Update):
Sebesta stands Accused of orchestrating
transcript changes during the trial of Thomas Torlincasi
whose company donated the logs for the Aggie Bonfire that collapsed in
1998. Apparently, he would sit down with the court reporter after the
trials, which happened to be a woman he knew personally, and re-wrote what
they thought was relevant from the trial hearings. He also used ample
amounts of evidence in the Bonfire case that was never submitted as
evidence before trial. However, all of this evidence happened to have
tagged and labeled as being submitted into evidence which proves that Sebesta was forging documents for his arguments. Sebesta became known for “doing business”
with witnesses and victims that provided testimony in the Bonfire case that
gave evidence in favor of Sebesta’s
arguments.
Law enforcement officer testimonies in the case did not match. These
officers all personally knew Charles Sebesta. The
initial trial was declared a mistrial since certain jurors didn’t
show up for court. Sebesta had two particular
jurors not show up by having them pretend to be sick.
Sebesta charged Thomas Torlincasi
with criminal negligence even though Torlincasi
never committed an act worthy of a charge. Torlincasi
had already spent time in jail before Sebesta
decided to go after him in the first place. Sebesta
allegedly blackmailed Ben Flencher who was
testifying in favor of Torlincasi. Sebesta allegedly found out Flencher
was having an affair and threatened his reputation and said he would give
him up to his wife if he testified against his case. He first made the top
ten with his role in the Anthony Graves Case and it now seems he has a
track record going.
Charles C. Foti
Jr./ Former Attorney General of Louisiana
- (Update):
Charles Foti finished last in Louisiana’s
three-way primary in October 2007 and was replaced by James
“Buddy” Caldwell Jr. in Louisiana.
Foti now works at the law firm Kahn Gauthier Swick, LLC. He handles KGS’s
securities and consumer fraud practice.
Foti is still the target of much criticism for
his part in the prosecutions pursued surrounding Hurricane Katrina. Many
families are taking advantage of Foti’s
blunders by filing frivolous civil lawsuits against the doctors that Foti had accused during Hurricane Katrina and the
doctors are still preparing for all of those civil cases; most of them are
costing the doctors ample amounts of money.
The State of Louisiana has passed two bills in the senate to protect people
from lawyers with habits similar to Foti’s
which provide immunity from civil liability for in-state doctors and
volunteers from out of state practicing in disaster zones. Protection from
criminal liability is currently under House debate in Louisiana.
Alice Martin/ U.S. Attorney, Northern District of Alabama:
If former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman had
found a way to get out of the grasp of U.S. Attorney Leura
Canary, he still didn’t have much of a chance to get away from the
other mass of Republicans foaming at the mouth for the opportunity to take
over the Alabama State Legislature. Alice Martin, an Alabama prosecutor who has been serving
since September 2001, was another conspirator and attacker that aided in
the successful attempt to takedown the Governor. Make no mistake; Alice
Martin is involved in several scams besides the Siegelman
trial as a prosecutor out of Birmingham,
Alabama. Two of the most
prominent cases involve Alex Latifi, a firm
supporter of the ex-governor and active liberal Democrat, and
Martin’s despicable prosecution directed at the Axion
Corporation.
Martin’s destruction of Alex Latifi came
out of political tensions considering Latifi is
an adamant liberal Democrat. Latifi was known for
making donations and contributions to the Democratic Party in the state of Alabama which helped keep many of their politicians
afloat in a dominant Republican
State. In order to
take him down, Martin hired a team of political “hack”
assistants. The Latifi case was also a
prosecution created out of extreme racial tension directed at Latifi since he happened to be an Iranian-American.
This Alabama
prosecutor’s heavy involvement in the Siegelman
trial was one to raise eyebrows. Martin was the first person to prosecute Siegelman, which was strategically timed around an
election in order to affect politics in Alabama. The first trial judge, without
second thoughts or signs of hesitation, threw the case out because of the
lack of evidence and the obvious motivation behind the timing of the
prosecution.
Alice Martin’s history with the law is dotted with numerous accounts
of misconduct and political manipulation. Martin once denied being involved
in the prosecution of Dickie Scruggs, who was the
former Senate GOP leader Trent Lott’s brother-in-law. She has made a
habit of coordinating closely with senior GOP figures that are close to current
Alabama Republican Governor, Bob Riley, which explains her agenda of
prosecuting those of liberal ideologies. Interestingly enough, Martin was
appointed by current President George W. Bush and craves an appointment as
a Federal Judge in Alabama
and is willing do anything to receive that appointment, even if achieving
that goal means misusing the law for her own benefit.
She is also guilty of making false and inflammatory secret submissions to
judges throughout the State. An example of disgraceful tactics outside of
the courtroom is her waiting to serve subpoenas on law makers on the floor
of the legislature that would be carefully timed to make the news. Martin
is apparently a prosecutor that is willing to give false testimony in order
to employ litigation in her favor. This was clear in her prosecution of The
Axion Corporation trial in which she was the main
prosecutor. Her main goal in the case was to put the company out of
business by ruining their reputation whether or not the CEO’s were
even convicted. In the end, Axion was acquitted
of violating the Arms Export Control Act which was the most serious
prosecutorial charge. The case against Axion was
so outrageous that not only did the judge throw it out, but the judge in
turn made Martin pay all of the court charges and all charges the
defendants had to pay in order to prepare their defense.
Unfortunately, it has not been easy to criticize Martin for her antics
considering she brings charges upon those who do criticize her, most
notably, an individual employed at the University of Alabama.
Martin is just another example of Republicans trying to take control of the
legislature in Alabama,
the only branch of the Alabama State Government that the Republicans do not
control.
For prosecutorial actions, Alice Martin is being investigated by several
Government organizations on many levels. She is facing multiple ethics
investigations by the Office of Professional Responsibility for the cases
of Siegelman and The Axion
Corporation. She was also investigated by the Department of Justice for
charges made against her for perjury. The Justice Department, headed by
Alberto Gonzales, somehow conveniently found that she has never committed
professional misconduct or poor judgment in office. The stranglehold of
corruption in the Justice Department continues to let bad prosecutors like
Alice Martin off the hook. If Alberto Gonzales were a straight shooting
Attorney General who conducted his office legally and ethically, Alice
Martin probably would have been disbarred and perhaps punished severely a
very long time ago. Maybe this will change with a change of administration.
Leura Canary/ U.S.
Attorney, Middle District of Alabama:
The systematic destruction of Don Siegelman’s
Governorship of Alabama is a prime example of corruption in our legal
system and the Republican Party’s policy of muscling those in their
way out of office, even if illegality is the only means of doing so. A list
of big-time Republican lawyers, lead by Leura
Canary, with the help of Republican stalwart Karl Rove, are accountable for
destroying this politician’s office and together played a huge hand
in the despicable sentence handed to the former Governor.
Democrat Don Siegelman was Alabama’s Governor from 1999-2003.
He was the only Governor in Alabama’s
history to hold all four major offices which included Governor, Secretary
of State, Attorney General, and Lieutenant Governor. Admittedly, Siegelman as Governor, did not
have the cleanest slate. In 2006, he was found guilty of corruption,
obstruction of justice, bribery, and mail fraud. These charges were a
connection between him and Richard M. Scrushy,
founder and former CEO of HealthSouth. Details of the charges involved an
exchange of $500,000 for a government job that would be given to Scrushy once Siegelman
retained his office in 2006. Siegelman was also
guilty of exchanging many other government favors for campaign donations.
Republican prosecutors jumped at the opportunity to wreak havoc upon Siegelman's office. Canary immediately took action by
having the first case against Siegelman dismissed
in order to have the trial in front of a judge whom she knew had a personal
grudge against Siegelman. During his trial
for misconduct, he lost the gubernatorial elections which were taking place
at the same time as the trial and would not be able to run against current
Republican Governor Bob Riley. Siegelman was
sentenced to seven years in prison by the Republican judge for his actions
which seemed extremely atypical. This sentence was unusual when you consider
previous corruption charges against other politicians which did not result
in imprisonment. Siegelman pointed out the case
of Republican politician Guy Hunt who was found guilty of pocketing
government money in Alabama
but was only given probation in comparison. Also, Siegelman
was denied the usual forty five days before having to report to serve jail
time. This type of mistreatment was harsh, especially for a former
Governor. Severe punishments like the one given to Siegelman
usually reflect a unanimous jury decision, but not so in Siegelman’s trial. If anything, the sentencing
reflected nothing more than a personal attack by a judge with conservative
ideologies. Siegelman argues that his unordinary
and immediate sentencing along with the implosion of his office was
manipulated by Republican “powerhouses.” Defense lawyers
representing Siegelman claim that the sentencing
was politically motivated and not lawfully made and that this was a
systematic, timely attack on the ex-Governor.
According to Jill Simpson, during a meeting in 2001, Karl Rove asked her to
uncover ways to ruin the Governor, Leura Canary
became the main weapon used to attack Siegelman. Leura Canary ultimately became the focus of criticism
from Democrats when information relating to her prosecution began to
surface. Simpson’s testimony before the House Judiciary Committee
provided a first hand account of an organized conservative attack on
successful Democratic politics in a majority Republican state. According to
Simpson, Karl Rove asked her if she could try to catch Siegelman
cheating on his wife. Her assignment was to see if she could take
pictures of Siegelman in a compromising sexual
position with one of his aides, thus uncovering ways to ruin the Governor.
Simpson spied on Siegelman for months but saw
nothing incriminating. All of the prosecutors involved, especially
Canary, have yet to respond to a Congressional request for a presentation
of documents relating to this case. The Justice Department, still feeling
the influence of Alberto Gonzales, was required to produce documents
related to the Siegelman investigation. Records
produced by Gonzales were not made available until the day of his
retirement, which also happened to be the day after the date that the
documents could be authorized as evidence for presentation before Congress.
It is no secret that the Siegelman prosecution,
coordinated by Canary, was a five year campaign to ruin the ex-Governor.
Canary’s investigation of Siegelman forced
the end of a well respected Governor for nothing more than political party
dedication. Leura Canary continued to involve
herself in the case nationally making a mockery of her recusal after being
accused of political corruption by Siegelman’s
lawyers. Manipulation to this magnitude is never unnoticed and the
investigation Canary lead is completely unjustifiable. This case is a great
example of political corruption in the legal system and shows the agenda
Republican politicians and lawyers have when given powerful positions.
Canary’s willingness to participate in such actions and her political
involvement in this case should lead to her disbarment, as well as an
investigation of her actions and behavior during the Siegelman
trial. This nomination shows that Top Worst Prosecutors has no gender bias.
Mark Burnette/
Former West Virginia
Prosecutor:
Prosecutors should never be allowed to use a court case as a springboard
for an election. This is especially true when they prosecute an innocent
defendant that was wrongfully tried and found guilty. Unfortunately, a
woman named Marybeth Davis from West
Virginia has fallen victim to the likes of Mark Burnette who uses similar techniques in order to
further his career. Marybeth Davis is currently serving life in prison for
the murder of her daughter and 18 years in prison for the poisoning of her
son thanks to Mark Burnette’s failure to be
favored in the courtroom.
Marybeth was found guilty of giving her daughter, Tegan,
an overdose of caffeine in 1982 which lead to her tragic death. She was
also found guilty of poisoning her son with insulin. This case wasn’t
tried until 1996 because of mismanagement by the original prosecutor and
the police officer in charge by the name of Michael Spradlin.
Investigators of the case later found that natural causes, not poisoning,
lead to each child’s death. Seth happened to have Human Growth
Hormone Deficiency and Tegan was a victim of
Reye’s syndrome.
As the case was brought to the attention of Burnette
by Trooper Spradlin, immediate misconduct and
mismanagement of the law were seen from Burnette’s
office. Burnette originally withheld autopsy
slides in the original trial that showed Tegan
died of Reye’s syndrome which would have proved Marybeth’s
innocence. Burnette to this day denies that the
evidence from the slides would have had any effect on the case. If this is
so, then why is he so afraid to release them? Burnette
is also guilty of having the toxicologist, a woman by the name of Dr. Scharman, lie about the amount of caffeine in Tegan’s blood system. During the trial, Dr. Scharman somehow managed to mix up milligrams and
milliliters when reporting information to the jury. Not only is this a
large disservice to everyone in the courtroom but also to the country,
considering she has recently been given an award for helping protect the
nation from biological terrorism. It’s not very comforting to know
people defending us from biological attacks don’t know how to tell
the difference between these two measurements that are taught to youngsters
in middle school. The truth of the matter is that the caffeine amount in Tegan’s system was nowhere near a lethal amount
and a majority of it came from the last ditch effort made by ER surgeons to
resuscitate Tegan in the emergency room.
Interestingly enough, the emergency room and ambulance records remain
missing to this day.
Burnette is also the type of prosecutor who uses
unfair tactics in the courtroom to his advantage. For example, when
Marybeth admitted to giving Tegan coca-cola syrup
to relieve the child of headaches when she originally thought Tegan had the flu, Burnette
spent the rest of the case referring to the syrup as “coke” in
order to make what Marybeth did seem much worse than it actually was in
order to sway the jury in favor of the prosecution. Burnette
made another terrible offense in this case by withholding the c-peptide
test results which determine where insulin in the body comes from. More
specifically, this test would be able to provide information of the
possibility of insulin coming from an outside source or if it were just
generated from natural causes. Therefore, Marybeth’s defense was
entirely unfair since this evidence was not released in considering the
accusations brought against her in Seth’s case.
Mark Burnette has recently admitted that several
tests should have been done such as checking for dietary pills that could
have been the cause of death which was not ever performed. Burnette, feeling the heat of much criticism, has said
that during the upcoming appeal if Marybeth pleas guilty to two counts of
poisoning, then the prosecution will tell the judge that she has served her
time and should be allowed to go home. Of course, there is no guarantee
that the judge will feel the same. Other disturbing factors of this case
include the fact that Trooper Spradlin, who
received an honorary “Top Trooper” award from Bill Clinton, is
best friends with Mark Burnette. He even stood in
as Mark’s best man at his wedding. Not only have both men been
accused of conspiracy for falsifying information in partnership with one another,
but both are guilty of threatening witnesses and issuing threats to sue
those who criticize them. Both men appear to only want to advance their
careers and Burnette should not be surprised to
find himself facing a bar proceeding for withholding evidence and
manipulating witnesses’ testimonies which have sent an innocent woman
to prison for the rest of her life.
Mary Lacy/ Boulder County, Colorado
DA:
The name Mary Lacy falls into the category of one of the worst prosecutors
placed in office over the last decade. The Boulder County District Attorney
was the lead prosecutor in the JonBenet Ramsey
murder case which has been ongoing for the last twelve years. JonBenet was a child beauty pageant contestant who was
found murdered in the basement of her parent’s house in Boulder, Colorado
during the Christmas holiday in 1996. She was noticed missing when a note
was found on the staircase of her house demanding an $118,000 ransom for
her release. The amount was the sum of her father’s Christmas bonus
of that year.
Several problems arose instantly from Mary Lacy’s
investigation of the murder. Immediate problems included the original crime
scene was not properly sealed off due to inexperienced detectives at the
murder scene. Lacy’s investigators only
determined that the child died – nothing more. JonBenet
had a skull fracture and was strangled; however, there was never any
evidence uncovered that showed signs of conventional rape. Interestingly
enough in 2006, a man by the name of John Mark Karr openly admitted being
with JonBenet on the day of her death. During his
arrest in Bangkok, Thailand, he openly confessed
that he beat JonBenet savagely and then proceeded
to rape her. Mary Lacy’s investigators
failed to find DNA evidence that placed Karr at the murder scene and Lacy
pursued no further prosecution of the man who had pleaded guilty to the
killing which has allowed him to live his life normally in Beijing, China. Since then, Lacy has
focused solely on pursuing JonBenet’s
parents and her brother.
The two remaining suspects have recently been proven innocent with newly
discovered evidence found in early July, 2008. The evidence was found by
way of new DNA tests that focus on skin cells left behind from a mere touch
which were found on JonBenet’s long
underwear. The evidence proves the presence of a third party at the time of
the murder, providing proof of innocence to the parents, relieving them of
any further turmoil of Lacy’s
investigation. Therefore, the killer has yet to be determined since the new
DNA tests recently conducted showed a negative match to Karr being the
murderer.
The investigation severely damaged the Ramsey’s reputation. Constant
tabloid smearing of the couple and JonBenet’s
brother was a common occurrence across the country. T.V. Crime shows based
off of the murder were even created to damage the image of the two parents
since society was never provided with alternative suspects because of
District Attorney Lacy’s despicable
investigative tactics. Several defamation lawsuits arose in which the
parents had to defend themselves because of their reputation as presented
by Lacy.
Since this new evidence has been released, the only recourse Lacy has
offered was a letter of apology to the family, which hardly justifies the
suffering she has caused the Ramsey’s over the last several years.
Unfortunately, JonBenet’s mother will never
be able to receive that apology since she died of cancer in 2006.
District Attorney Mary Lacy was accused of a cover up due to the poor
investigation that was carried out. Lacy, who will be stepping down in
January 2009 due to her reaching the maximum term limits served in office,
has tried explaining that she had doubts that the Ramsey parents ever took
part in the murder. To justify that statement may prove difficult since her
investigation clearly showed intent to blame the parents of an entanglement
in a murder which was based on very circumstantial evidence and absolutely
no real proof of who committed the crime. District Attorney Lacy needs to
be investigated for her unwillingness to take time to consider hard
evidence before prosecuting suspects and a policy of being quick to lay
blame and promote unjust accusations in order to boost self reputation.
Michael McDougal/ Former Montgomery
County, Texas DA:
When you’ve held an office for twenty years, political elections and
campaigns tend to come and go without too much worry of retaining your
office. They do however become more difficult when rights you are entitled
to in office are misused and abused. Michael McDougal, the Montgomery
County, Texas District Attorney, is very familiar with this type of
situation considering he was in the thick of a heated political race for
the November elections.
The long standing District Attorney was in a dead heat with a “new
kid on the block” named Brett Ligon.
McDougal couldn’t manage to win the Republican primary and therefore
has chosen to run as an Independent when he only received 37% of the vote
to Ligon’s 44%. The reason for
McDougal’s troubles had to do with his involvement in the
misappropriation of funds in his department’s office. McDougal
managed to use money from the drug forfeiture accounts in his department to
purchase alcohol and other miscellaneous items for staff parties. He also
provided the funds to employees for bonuses and sent some of the seized
money to charitable organizations. McDougal stead fastly
disputed these accusations until receipts from the liquor stores he
purchased alcohol began to surface. McDougal tried to make the case that he
was not aware that those confiscated criminal funds were to be used for
police purposes only. Even then, he insists that he can use the government
regulated money as he pleases. This is an example of a prosecutor in power
with complete disregard of jurisdictional responsibilities and a lack of
knowledge of the conduct required by his office.
Brett Ligon defeated McDougal in the primaries by
pointing to other flaws along with the money schemes that the District
Attorney committed during his tenure in office. The most common accusation
is that he is extremely lax towards DWI cases and that criminal cases
aren’t disposed of quickly enough in his department. McDougal has
made a habit of taking several months to file charges against criminals
that commit a DWI and several other types of criminal acts which has
angered law enforcement officials in Montgomery County.
McDougal’s handling of DWI offenders has been inexplicable
considering he does not seize vehicles of repeat offenders and he also does
not require mandatory blood testing of suspected DWI criminals.
McDougal’s actions, or lack thereof, have attracted attention across
the State of Texas
and the nation. He is currently being investigated by the State Senate
Criminal Justice Committee led by Chairman Whitmire.
He is also facing several ethics complaints by the Texas Bar Association
and is under investigation by the Texas Attorney General’s Office for
his carelessness.
Bonnie Dumanis/
San Diego, California DA:
Evidently, for certain prosecutors, evidence is not required anymore in
order to send people to jail. These particular tactics tend to backfire
when that person is innocent. Apparently San Diego District Attorney Bonnie
Dumanis did not get the memo. Bonnie Dumanis receives a nomination for one of the ten worst
prosecutors in America
for her career boosting lawless tactics in California.
Dumanis’ wrongful prosecution of Cynthia Sommer with the accusation of poisoning her husband
with arsenic was a pitiful manipulation of the court system. Recent testing
provided samples of new tissue which had no trace of any poison in Mr. Sommer’s body at the time of his death.
Unfortunately for Mrs. Sommer, she spent two
years in a California State Prison for the crime she was accused of
committing by District Attorney Dumanis. A San Diego judge
released Sommer immediately after a recent
retrial which provided this new evidence proving Sommer’s
innocence.
Government experts provided testimony at the retrial that original evidence
used by DA Dumanis to prosecute Sommer was extremely contaminated and should have been
thrown out. Bonnie Dumanis’ accusations
relied heavily on very circumstantial evidence including Mr. and Mrs. Sommers’ debt as a motive for Mrs. Sommer’s suspected killing of her husband. Sommer was also falsely accused of wanting to kill her
husband for the sake of obtaining money for breast implants and also
wanting to live a more exciting lifestyle as a motive for the murder.
Dumanis defends her prosecution with the argument
that the prosecution was based on sufficient “available”
evidence. Dumanis’ prosecutorial procedures
in this case definitely need to be investigated to compensate Mrs. Sommer for two years she spent in prison. Dumanis is likely to be responsible for a punitive
damage award received by Sommer. One would also
expect several lawsuits to arise out of the current developments of this
case.
Chuck Rosenthal/ Former Harris
County, Texas DA:
Experienced District Attorneys that don’t play by the rules are
unfortunately becoming common. The former Harris County District Attorney
Chuck Rosenthal is an example of a prosecutor that fits that description.
Therefore, he is nominated for being one of the worst prosecutors in the
country for his misconduct in office.
Rosenthal has been involved with drug abuse problems, sex scandals, and is
accused of manipulating the political process. He doesn’t deny that
on several occasions, he had abused his pharmaceutical prescriptions which
had major effects on his judgment during his tenure in office. The worst
accusations came when he was caught using government computers for
networking sources of income and promotions for his campaign for reelection
in Harris County. Emails containing racist and
sexist jokes found on his government computer proved his misconduct in
office. Not only should a racist District Attorney be booted from his/her
position, but the fact that he resides over the district office that hands
out more death penalty sentences a year makes his history of racism a major
issue. Numerous adult video clips were also found on his computer along
with several letters to his mistress to whom he gave a $10,000 raise.
Added offenses include him being found in contempt of court by tampering
with federal evidence. The evidence included 2,500 emails subpoenaed in
which he completely threw out or destroyed. In his contempt of court
hearing, he contradicted himself many times and may have committed perjury.
Harris County tax payers are paying for his
contempt of court charges. His other mistakes include thirty two
indictments that have been thrown out because of paperwork entanglement in
his office.
Many prominent Republicans and Democrats have spoken out against Rosenthal
for his corruption and have even campaigned against him. After the scandals
he was involved in, he was prosecuted on the grounds of official
misconduct, incompetency, and intoxication. The GOP local party was fed up
and in February 2008, he resigned. Chuck Rosenthal may still face
investigations - Harris County Government Chief Ed Emmett has called for an
intense examination of his activities.
Honorable Mention –
David Ceballes
III/ Otero County, New Mexico DA:
Civilized courts typically will take action against prosecutors who
practice intimidation tactics in the court room. By holding prosecutors
responsible for such actions, lawyers will usually be disbarred from
practicing when found guilty of doing so in America. The 12th District
Court of New Mexico and its judges don’t make habits of exercising
this preventative method, and Republican David Ceballes
III has been allowed to take advantage of the lack of enforcement by using
intimidation in the courtroom.
The judges of the 12th District are under much scrutiny for allowing Ceballes to not only use these measures, but for
allowing him to go above and beyond these procedures. This was ever so
evident when Ceballes recently threatened the
warden of the county jail with conspiracy. Shouldn’t a red flag be
raised when a Warden is threatened for wanting to testify in court
truthfully? Ceballes made these allegations when
the warden was going to testify in favor of an inmate Ceballes
was prosecuting. Usually this sort of action would get prosecutors sent to
prison in the United
States. The case involved an inmate who
was in possession of a razor blade that he claimed was used for cutting
hair, which Ceballes argued could have been used
to cause great harm and should be considered possession of a deadly weapon.
All of the officers at the prison where the prisoner was being held,
including Warden Jeffers, disagreed with Ceballes.
This prosecutor has also been known to botch cases, most notably a rape
case in which he was unable to bring to court within the time limits
allowed by the State. Ceballes should be
investigated for inappropriate strategies used in the courtroom.
Michael Mukasey/
U.S. Attorney General:
Michael Mukasey was brought into the Justice
Department to fix all the mishaps of Alberto Gonzales. As far as we at Bob
Bennett & Associates are concerned, he has done nothing to repair any
of the problems he has been faced with. He has yet to place Monica Goodling
and others at the forefront of any investigation but instead has
down-played the political hiring process in the Department. He has openly
spoken out about issues he has been faced with, but has taken no action
whatsoever to help the national legal crisis created by Gonzales. If
anything, he has defended Gonzales and his aides rather than doing his job
of holding those responsible for allowing the Department to become a
political hiring office. He has supported claims of executive privilege and
immunity in order to counter accusations brought upon the accused, even
though the law itself doesn’t support those claims. Just as with
Alberto Gonzales, it is already blatantly obvious that Mukasey
supports politics over justice.
Updates concerning last
year’s winners:
Michael Nifong/
North Carolina
DA:
The North Carolina State Bar Disciplinary Committee unanimously stripped Nifong of his law license in response to his ethics
violations. He was found guilty on 27 of 32 charges, sentenced to one day
in jail, and fined $500 for criminal contempt of court during his trial. In
January 2008, Nifong filed for bankruptcy in
hopes of getting the numerous civil suits filed against him thrown out. The
residing bankruptcy judge threw out the bankruptcy claim in May of 2008,
allowing the plaintiffs their pursuit of all lawsuits directed at Nifong.
Jeffrey Auerhahn/
Assistant U.S.
Attorney:
Auerhahn has not received any discipline for his
misconduct in office. The Justice Department, lead by Michael Mukasey, is regularly receiving open criticism from all
over the country for not pursuing any form of punishment directed at Auerhahn. Auerhahn is still
currently employed at the U.S. Attorneys Office where he is assigned to the
Antiterrorism Unit. This is another great example of Republicans protecting
members of their party with complete disregard for legal justice.
David McDade/
Douglas County, Georgia DA:
In late 2007, Genarlow Wilson, whose sentence was
widely denounced in the State of Georgia after being prosecuted unfairly by
McDade, was released from prison when the Georgia
Supreme Court found that his sentence was cruel and unusual. The Court
found that trying David as an adult was extremely harsh and undeserving.
For some reason, McDade has refused to let the
prosecution go away. He has continued to harass Wilson even though he has been acquitted
of all charges.
|
