Oh, my my my. Things are getting quite interesting up in the star chamber.
CBS News | U.S. Prosecutor Sues Ashcroft | February 17, 2004 15:33:37: A federal prosecutor in a major terrorism case in Detroit has taken the rare step of suing Attorney General John Ashcroft, alleging the Justice Department interfered with the case, compromised a confidential informant and exaggerated results in the war on terrorism. Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Convertino of Detroit accused the Justice Department of "gross mismanagement" of the war on terrorism in a lawsuit filed late Friday in federal court in Washington. Justice officials said Tuesday they had not seen the suit and had no comment .... Convertino is seeking damages under the Privacy Act, alleging he has been subjected to an internal investigation as retaliation for his cooperation with the Senate and that information from the internal probe was wrongly leaked to news media. The lawsuit states Convertino first complained to his superiors more than a year ago about Justice's interference in the Detroit terrorism trial, saying Washington supervisors "had continuously placed perception over reality to the serious detriment of the war on terror."
It will be interesting to see what, if anything, comes of this. This would seem to involve the case previously mentioned in these parts, where the Justice Department engaged in what could kindly be called some egregious prosecutorial misconduct. Interestingly, as far as I can tell from this article, Covertino does not seem to be stating that he did not engage in the misconduct alleged, but that he was retaliated against for telling the Senate investigation about said misconduct. According to the Newsday article on this suit, Convertino admits withholding the information, thinking it was a judgement call:
Prosecutor Sues Bosses, Ashcroft By Tom Brune, Newsday WASHINGTON BUREAU, February 18, 2004 (registration required): A federal prosecutor in a significant but troubled terrorism case in Detroit has sued his superiors, including Attorney General John Ashcroft, accusing them of interference, mismanagement and compromising a confidential informant. Richard Convertino, a 14-year veteran assistant U.S. attorney who was removed from the case in September, filed the lawsuit Friday in the latest blow to the one-time showcase terrorism trial - now on the verge of falling apart - of an alleged "sleeper cell." ... In September, the Justice Department removed Convertino and his co-counsel, Keith Corbett, from the case without explanation. In December, U.S. District Judge Gerald Rosen, who is overseeing the case, issued a lengthy ruling that included a rare public rebuke to Ashcroft for violating a gag order on the case, resulting in an equally rare apology by an attorney general. At the same time, Rosen called for an emergency hearing on defense attorney complaints about prosecutorial misconduct - notably the government's failure to turn over a letter by an imprisoned drug gang leader who said the prosecution's key witness, Yousseff Hmimssa, said he made up his testimony. The government since has said it should have turned over the letter to the defense attorneys, even though Convertino in court had defended his decision not to because he thought it was not credible.
Convertino's lawsuit appears to be an outgrowth of his removal from the case and his disputes with his superiors. In what is commonly known as a "whistle-blower lawsuit," Convertino accuses the Justice Department of violating his First Amendment rights and the Privacy Act.
Surely it wasn't Convertino's job to decide whether or not the letter was credible. I would have thought that it was his job to hand over the letter to the defense, who could then interview the witness and make their own determination. One also wonders what would make the government's "admitted con man", as the CBSNews article refers to their informant, so very much more trustworthy than the jailhouse informant who alleged that said con man was unreliable.
In any event, Justice seems to be turning into an intriguing little election year vulnerability. One wonders how long the administration can allow Justice to continue to make these sorts of headlines before doing something about it. Mind, I don't expect that they'll fire Ashcroft, however sensible that might be -- one suspects that relatively little of his own initiative created this disastrous situation, although he has almost certainly helped it along. But if Justice keeps making headlines that essentially say, "Department of Justice perverts the course of justice --- AGAIN," then they'll have to do something big and showy to put justice back into good odor, now won't they?
Posted by iain at February 18, 2004 03:05 PM
