The Case for a Strong, Independent Judiciary
Although it may be hard to believe, there once was a time when civil liberties trumped government secrecy and government security policies. Ways were found to balance the requirement of a fair trial for a defendant and the need to keep sensitive government information out of the hands of those who would do the nation harm. The key to the system working was, of course, having a judiciary committed to the system of justice defined in the US Constitution.
Oddly enough, a few of those judges still exist, among them Leonie Brinkema, who currently is presiding over the Zacarias Moussaoui trial. Her slapdown of a government lawyer in the penalty phase of the case has reminded the country (especially us lawyer types) that certain rules of trial conduct are still in play in the post-9/11 world. The NY Times has the story.
Ms. Martin, an obscure official in the counsel's office at the Transportation Security Administration, now appears to bear responsibility for undercutting the government's long-running effort to execute the only man tried in an American courtroom for involvement in the Sept. 11 attacks.
Known among her peers as an aggressive, largely behind-the-scenes courtroom strategist, she is said by the judge in the case to have committed a potentially devastating blunder of the sort that law students are routinely warned about: coaching witnesses.
Dealing a major setback to the government's prosecution of Zacarias Moussaoui, Judge Leonie M. Brinkema ruled on Tuesday that because of three significant instances of misbehavior by government lawyers during the trial, most notably the missteps by Ms. Martin, she was barring the prosecutors from using any testimony or evidence from a handful of government aviation officials.
...In the Moussaoui case, her communications with witnesses, and new evidence that surfaced Tuesday that she told some witnesses not to cooperate with defense lawyers, puts the prosecution in the position of having to investigate and sharply criticize a government lawyer who has worked on the case. [Emphasis added]
Carla Martin, from the information that has surfaced so far, clearly engaged in prosecutorial misconduct. That sort of behavior, stemming from the win-at-any-cost approach to litigation, deserves a slapdown, a hard one.
The real story, however, is (to my mind) not Carla Martin. It is Leonie Brinkema, a judge who has taken her oath seriously. With a strong, independent judiciary we have a better chance at muddling through these difficult times. Judge Brinkema is evidence that we just might have that kind of judiciary.
Oddly enough, a few of those judges still exist, among them Leonie Brinkema, who currently is presiding over the Zacarias Moussaoui trial. Her slapdown of a government lawyer in the penalty phase of the case has reminded the country (especially us lawyer types) that certain rules of trial conduct are still in play in the post-9/11 world. The NY Times has the story.
Ms. Martin, an obscure official in the counsel's office at the Transportation Security Administration, now appears to bear responsibility for undercutting the government's long-running effort to execute the only man tried in an American courtroom for involvement in the Sept. 11 attacks.
Known among her peers as an aggressive, largely behind-the-scenes courtroom strategist, she is said by the judge in the case to have committed a potentially devastating blunder of the sort that law students are routinely warned about: coaching witnesses.
Dealing a major setback to the government's prosecution of Zacarias Moussaoui, Judge Leonie M. Brinkema ruled on Tuesday that because of three significant instances of misbehavior by government lawyers during the trial, most notably the missteps by Ms. Martin, she was barring the prosecutors from using any testimony or evidence from a handful of government aviation officials.
...In the Moussaoui case, her communications with witnesses, and new evidence that surfaced Tuesday that she told some witnesses not to cooperate with defense lawyers, puts the prosecution in the position of having to investigate and sharply criticize a government lawyer who has worked on the case. [Emphasis added]
Carla Martin, from the information that has surfaced so far, clearly engaged in prosecutorial misconduct. That sort of behavior, stemming from the win-at-any-cost approach to litigation, deserves a slapdown, a hard one.
The real story, however, is (to my mind) not Carla Martin. It is Leonie Brinkema, a judge who has taken her oath seriously. With a strong, independent judiciary we have a better chance at muddling through these difficult times. Judge Brinkema is evidence that we just might have that kind of judiciary.
posted by Diane at 4:35 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home