Moussaoui may beat Death Penalty...

[Hutch]

...because the Government lawyers, with a slam-dunk conviction and a nearly-sure death penalty phase (I mean, think what you will of the death penalty, someone convicted of taking part in a plan to kill in cold blood 3,000+ people would have to qualify, or nobody would) may have FUBAR'ed the whole thing.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/13/moussaoui.trial.ap/index.html

An angry federal judge unexpectedly recessed the death penalty trial of al Qaeda conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui to consider whether government violations of her rules against coaching witnesses should remove the death penalty as an option.

"This is the second significant error by the government affecting the constitutional rights of the defendant and the criminal justice system in this country in the context of a death case," Brinkema told lawyers in the case outside the presence of the jury.

and

"In all the years I've been on the bench, I have never seen such an egregious violation of a rule on witnesses," she said.

Now, I'm not a lawyer, but getting the Judge that P.O.'ed does not strike me as being really smart. So Moussaoui may get life with the US picking up the tab.

Thoughts?


EDITED TO ADD: go to Cylinder's thread, same topic, but he beat me by 2 minutes in posting it..@#$!@#%!$%@# speed typist.

 

[FreeChile]

I just want to know what happens to those who violate court rules this way. Do they get disbarred or something?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/13/AR2006031300506.html

Judge Halts Moussaoui Trial
Government Violation of Court May Rule Out Death Penalty

By Jerry Markon and Timothy Dwyer
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, March 13, 2006; 1:48 PM

A federal judge today halted the death penalty trial of Sept. 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui and indicated she might throw out the death penalty entirely after prosecutors disclosed that a government attorney had violated the court's rules about discussing witness testimony.

U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema called it "the most egregious violation of the court's rules on witnesses'' she had seen "in all the years I've been on the bench."

 

[hgc]

I just want to know what happens to those who violate court rules this way. Do they get disbarred or something?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/13/AR2006031300506.html

Judging by the way past miscreants have been rewarded, I think a Medal of Freedom is in order.

 

[Beerina]

The attorneys run a calculated risk on how far they can push things in their favor. There's tremendous pressure on the judge not to do things the public will hate -- judges are elected in many cases, and whoever appoints them certainly are. And getting rid of the death penalty in this case would cause a hornet's nest for the relevant elected officials. Hence the attorney is probably playing a calculated risk that this won't happen.

And, so far, he is right on the money. I'll assume a he, sexistly.

 

[JamesDillon]

There's tremendous pressure on the judge not to do things the public will hate -- judges are elected in many cases, and whoever appoints them certainly are.

This is a federal judge-- lifetime appointment, can only be removed by impeachment. Federal judges are appointed by the president, so whoever appointed her (I have no idea who that was) doesn't have to worry about reelection.

And, so far, he is right on the money. I'll assume a he, sexistly.

An incorrect assumption, it appears. From the CNN article:

Government officials identified the attorney as Carla Martin.

Edit: Of course, I'm making a sexist assumption that Carla is a female.