Posted on 03/15/2006 2:32:48 PM PST by Aussie Dasher
The Clinton-appointed federal judge who tossed out half the government's death penalty case against convicted 9/11 "20th hijacker" Zacarias Moussaoui on Tuesday has a history of liberal rulings and was once named by Sen. Bob Dole to the "Clinton Hall of Shame."
Even before Judge Leonie Brinkema decimated the government's case by ruling that evidence from key witnesses had been tainted by prosecutorial misconduct, veteran terrorism prosecutor Andrew McCarthy warned Brinkema not to overreact.
Writing about the furor over the prosecution's blunder on NationalReviewOnline Monday, McCarthy said: "It is a tempest in a teapot that is obviously being blown out of proportion — as frequently happens with people philosophically opposed to the death penalty, who often portray every run-of-the-mill error in death-penalty proceedings as if it were Armageddon."
McCarthy added that he wasn't sure that the liberal justice indeed held those views, but noted, "This is only a big problem if Judge Brinkema, for whatever reason, decides to turn it into one."
That's exactly what the Clinton appointee did with her ruling the next day - a move that fits the pattern of liberal decisions that prompted Sen. Dole to name Brinkema ten years ago to what he called the "Clinton Hall of Shame."
Dole cited a 1995 case in which Brinkema gave a mere 21 month sentence to a convicted murderer, instead of the seven-to nine-year term called for by federal guidelines.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit later overturned her ruling.
Dole isn't alone in blasting Brinkema for her judicial activism. "It's my impression that she is highly ideological," complained Delaware State Representative Richard Black three years later.
According to the St. Paul Pioneer Press, Black was outraged by a 1998 Brinkema decision, that barred the Loudoun County, Va., public library from using filters to prevent adults from viewing sexually explicit material on the Internet.
Noted the Press: "That decision, and another in which Brinkema struck down as unconstitutional a law that prohibits Virginia employees from using government resources to access sexually explicit Web sites, earned her a mocking 'court jester' award for judicial activism from the conservative Family Research Council."
Exactly right on the trial vs. "other options." This is why we should not try ANY terrorists.
Problem was, the Kemp that showed up was Neutered, and was forced to spew crap he didn't really believe. It was horrible. They should have adopted his platform and let him lead from the VP spot. That would have been their only hope to get the masses excited.
We could have knocked off Willy with a decent candidate. Tragic waste of an opportunity!
I'm fuzzy on the facts, so I'm in no position to argue. I don't know how you can begin to hold a fair trial, though, by preventing witnesses from testifying.
He was in full "I'm a Republican, but I'm not a racist!" mode. He's always tended to do that. And he says , "In my view ..." all the time, which I learned in grade school, is stupid. He was apologizing for being right and appeared unprepared to boot. He should have destroyed Gore and blew it. Broke my heart.
Uh, back to the terrorist for a moment rather than rehashing a long ago election, I think it's just fine if he doesn't get the death penalty. Just let him out in the prison yard for excersize and fresh air....and the regular prison population. I think they'll treat him somewhat worse than they do child molestors, and it will be a lot quicker.
Oops, should have said "and to be with the regular prison population"...
Since a death penalty phase of a trial is not actually a trial, can it be appealed?
Somebody with a far greater understanding of legal matters than I should answer that one.
That's why I think the TSA lawyer ought to get fried over the whole thing. Law is about process, not judgement. She should have known that violating the judges rule about not coaching the witness would likely lead to the witness' testimony being thrown out.
Hmmm... I just had a thought. This seems so obvious -- has anyone checked the TSA lawyer to see if she had a reason to try to cripple the government's case against Moussaoui (or however the hell you spell his name?)
I suddenly wonder if she was trying to throw the game.....
No. Not surprising at all. The prosecution tampered with witnesses. The judge didn't like that. It's not good for the prosecution to phone a bunch of non-prosecution witnesses (at least that's what was on the radio.)
Mark Levin addressed this last night. I believe he said it was almost impossible.
A.I.D.S., veneral diseases and Clinton judicial appointees just keep on giving.
And then abolish that stupid monstrosity.
" ...Judge Leonie Brinkema decimated the government's case ..."
That's a crock! J. Brinkema didn't decimate the government's case, a government attorney did .. so let's not put the blame for this on Brinkema. We don't have to agree with her political instincts or all of her decisions but the govt attorney gave her no choice, and she could have been harsher had she chosen. Let's get the facts straight at least.
Like I said before, there's practical reasons to keep him alive. He may be carrying secrets. And to silence him will keep the Oliver Stones busy for 100 years.
Heh... I agree.
That said, Brinkema is raising a tempest in a teapot, and I don't doubt for a moment that her ideological bent has something to do with it.
If the lawyer was giving the witnesses trial testimony, that's obviously wrong. This is especially true if it was testimony from the punishment phase, which is what this is all about.
Still, the judge should inquire to determine whether the testimony has been tainted, not just exclude them.
Judge deserves a serious ass whoopin.
Not that I would advocate any thing like that happening.
Just wishful thinking.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.