Larry Ribstein notes the specter of prosecutorial misconduct and wonders when the press will pay attention. This probably bears watching.
FBI 302s are inherently unreliable; they are nothing more than a biased FBI agent's interpretation of what a witness said.
Orin: it is much more fun to make up one's mind before the evidence is in, or even before we hear what the other side has to say.
Mike, how much do you know about the individuals who made the calls on how to prosecute the case in order to make such a accusation?
Any prosecutor who has a conviction overturned due to actual innocence or prosecutorial misconduct should have to serve the sentence in place of the now-acquitted defendant whose life he/she ruined. ...
Similarly, 4th Amendment violations by the police should not result in exclusion of the evidence, but rather, punishment of the police officer equal to the punishment the defendant receives due to the introduction of the tainted evidence. ...
Any prosecutor who has a conviction overturned due to actual innocence or prosecutorial misconduct should have to serve the sentence in place of the now-acquitted defendant whose life he/she ruined. As it stands right now, they don't even lose their law license.
I'll be interested to see the government's response. In the meantime, perhaps we should keep in mind that a defense attorney's allegations of misconduct and proof of misconduct are not quite the same.
Is there information to show that they were unable to find an unfair jury?
Of course there remains the obvious: if a prosecutor later finds he made a mistake even if he properly followed available evidence, resulting in a not-guilty
person being convicted, this is a big disincentive for the prosecutor to cooperate in any effort to correct the situation.
Could it be that this is an imperfect sampling of such cases?
You really want to execute people for not filing Currency Transaction Reports for deposits or withdrawls over $10,000? Jeez.