« Another prominent (minority) athlete in trouble for lying about steriod use | Main | "Deregulating Guilt: The Information Culture of the Criminal System" »

February 11, 2009

More ugliness revealed in prosecution of former Senator Ted Stevens

This New York Times article provides more fascinating details concerning more of the ugliness surrounding the federal prosecution of former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens:

An F.B.I. agent who worked on the investigation of Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, who was convicted on ethics charges, has said in a stunning formal complaint that a fellow agent and prosecutors contrived to improperly conceal evidence from the court and the defense.

Among the startling accusations in the statement by the agent, Chad Joy, is that another agent maintained an inappropriate relationship with the prosecution’s star witness. Mr. Joy said his colleague, Mary Beth Kepner, almost always wore pants but on the day the witness, Bill Allen, took the stand, Ms. Kepner donned a skirt, which Mr. Joy said she described as “a present” to Mr. Allen....

Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, who presided over the Stevens trial in Federal District Court here, has called a hearing Friday to consider a request by Mr. Stevens’s lawyers for a new trial based on Mr. Joy’s complaint.

If this is what goes on even in a high-profile case when everyone knows their actions are likely to be scrutinized, imagine what might possibly take place in the thousands of other cases involving less prominent and powerful defendants.  I now remain truly sorry that Stevens lost his re-election bid because this experience might have turned him into a prominent critic of excessive prosecutorial power and a crusader for criminal defendants' rights.

Some related posts:

February 11, 2009 at 08:59 AM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference More ugliness revealed in prosecution of former Senator Ted Stevens:


The scowling Ted Stevens would never have been a defender of the rights of the accused just because he had been abused by the system. He is all for one and one for one.
The evidence of impropriety has to be better than the story that an agent always wore pants but wore a skirt for a witness as he took the stand "as a present". Did Bill Allen lie because there she was in the room in a skirt?

Then there is the allegation that the female agent went alone to the witness's hotel room. Where was she supposed to talk to him in confidence on short notice? The hotel bar perhaps?

If Stevens gets a new trial it will put the Grand Old Party back in the spot light once again. Fine with me.

Posted by: mpb | Feb 12, 2009 10:52:30 AM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB