Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Check out Bob Johnson's article, Al.com (AP) "Siegelman Attorney Asks for Canary Investigation" There are clearly some interesting legal questions here. An attorney with DOJ recuses herself, but the question may be what this attorney did prior to the recusal, and whether there was any involvement after it. Without the documents that are in the hands of the government, defense counsel is at a loss to prove anything. Defense counsel in these type of situations can be placed in a "catch-22" position. They need the evidence to present their claim, but need some showing of the claim to be able to secure the evidence. But more importantly, should DOJ be the one investigating this case, or would it have been better if there was an independent investigation here. And if there is nothing to hide than perhaps an independent investigation would be best for all sides. And why is the name Karl Rove surfacing in this article, yet again.