No Oral Argument in AJF Vincent Foster FOIA, Appeal 2

June 6, 2002 | Allan J. Favish

[AJFavish]

I haven't had time to post it on my web site yet, but today I received an order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit stating:

Before: PREGERSON, NOONAN and O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges

The judges on the panel to which these cases have been assigned have unanimously determined that the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the briefs and record. Accordingly, these cases were submitted on the briefs and records on May 20, 2002 in San Francisco, California, without oral argument.

[AJFavish]

I don't know when they will make a decision. The original Polaroid photos were supposed to be brought to the oral argument. Without an oral argument, it may be that they will only see the previously provided copies.

[DoughtyOne]

Interesting Alan. Any guess what's going on here?

[AJFavish]

I don't know. Could be just as they say, but I wonder if they will look at the original photos.

[DoughtyOne]

Wouldn't they have to, to rule?                                                                                                         

[thinden]

when you speak of the origianl photos, are you referring to ALL the polaroids?

p.s. congratulations on the progress.

[Churchill Gomez]

[AJFavish]

when you speak of the origianl photos, are you referring to ALL the polaroids?

Just the 10 at issue in this case. The 10 body polaroids from the park. Regards,

Allan J. Favish
http://www.allanfavish.com

[Fred Mertz]

Thanks for the update Allan.

[thinden]

nice likeness there, you big stud.

looks like they've filled that admin mod opening on the forum, sorry you missed it.

[Marianne]

Thanks for the update Allan.
DITTO

[Scholastic]

God bless you Allan, your doing a wonderful job and give heart to the reason why patriots should keep fighting.

[SteveH]

Well if no one else will do it, I will play the conspiracy theorist advocate.

Such an advocate would be concerned. The reason for the concern is the professed disinterest in the actual facts (in this case, the original polaroids).

Are the polaroids in good condition? Are the duplicates of obviously equivalent quality? Normal people (that is, people of less elevated intellect and erudition than are generally presumed of circuit court judges) might be interested. What condition are these contested items in at this very moment, in contrast to the condition they might be in based solely on the stipulation of the current custodians alone? Should I as a judge go "way out on a limb" (and possibly risk my future career, or even my life of that of my family, if conspiracy it really is), for just for a few ragged photos that are of supposed irrelevance to the public interest or even less value, if I take the arguments at face value?

Were I in the position of the judges, and things were really on the level in the 9th Circuit Court, I would have to say, yes, I want to see the photos for these reasons. Were I such, and things were on the level, I would have an almost pathological desire to bring these trinkets out in the sunlight just to see what happens when they emerge. I would welcome the publicity that it would generate, the coverage in the press, in celebration of the freedom that this country is based on and the openness of our system of justice, functioning at its finest in its service of "the people", not the government, and not politicians and bureaucrats as in so many other third rate governments that seem to dominate the world's geography at the moment. Hell yes, drag these suckers in the open and watch the bureaucrats have a cow.

I have spoken with people who work in D.C., who work in the Pentagon, and asked them specifically about the Vince Foster issue: what does it really mean? To them, personally?

After some dissembling and attempted changes of topic, the answer I got was: "be careful, and don't expect justice to prevail" as one might expect from conventional observations and study, inside the Beltway. That is the message of Vince Foster for today's D.C. bureaucrat, and to me, it is about as far away from "do the right thing for your country" as anything I have ever heard.

The conspiracy theorist in me says that these judges are getting the same message, either overtly or through more subtle ways... maybe their pets suddenly disappear overnight, or they get the Knowlton treatment, whatever. My observation of a few California judges in action does not give me any confidence that these people habitually hold either personal or professional integrity as a high goal... far from it-- it is not too difficult a stretch to imagine that these folks are in contrast fairly easy to compromise, either through carrot, stick, or some combination (my bet would be on the latter if I were forced).

Publicity, accountability, the spirit of the law, and the facts are evil and to be avoided with such officials. I'm sorry, but the actions fit the pattern too well for my own comfort. Perhaps things are better in different districts or at the S.C. level, and no one will be more pleased than I if I am proven wrong by subsequent events.

[Hughie2u]

We should not forget President Bush appointed Brett Kavanaugh to WH Counsel and John Bates to Federal Judge and those two men orchestrated the cover-up of Foster's Murder for the Kenneth Starr's Office.

If the court rules to release photos or not does not change the fact that we know who covered up the murder.

[a-whole-nother-box-of-pandoras]

bump

[floriduh voter]

I am new to this case. For all I know, you are a brilliant attorney and know way more than I do. When I worked as a paralegal, oral argument was supposed to be requested when the appeal was filed. And, even then, a lot of times oral argument isn't granted. I wouldn't read too much into that. Now I must go check out your url.