Travesty

Scott Horton, who was on the Siegelmen case as a miscarriage from the beginning, sheds more detail from what was written about yesterday:

Grimes quoted the lead prosecutor describing direct interaction with a juror who was about to be questioned by the judge and who was “scared and afraid she is going to get into trouble.” This conduct violated rules guaranteeing the independence of jurors as well as an order issued by the judge in court against dealings between the jurors and the prosecution team.

Communications of this sort between litigants and a juror often lead to a mistrial and potential disciplinary action against lawyers involved. However, the Justice Department kept these jury interactions secret from the court and defense counsel in what may constitute a serious act of obstruction.

It is not that hard to describe, as an attorney, what kind of interaction you can have with a juror.

NONE!

It is not a hard line to discern, you don't speak to jurors, you don't interact with them at all. Period.

If, by happenstance, you happen to run into a juror or accidentally speak to them, you immediately inform the court and opposing counsel.

If, particularly, in a criminal case a juror is contacting you or soliciting information, or sharing their concerns you (1) tell them to stop and (2) immediately inform the judge. The manner in which it was conducted in this case calls for criminal charges against the prosecutors, it's jury tampering and abuse of process pure and simple. But first they should have their licenses yanked.

The Judge in the Siegelman case was himself a real piece of work, but it tells you just how far the prosecution in this case was conducting itself as a rogue operation that they kept this to themselves.

This case isn't by any shot the greatest miscarriage of justice in American history, I'd bet there are a few hundred cases in Alabama along that top it (how many white murderers has an Alabama jury let go free when they lynched a black man? Hell, how many times were charges even brought -- or how many times has the lyncher been the police?)

Nevertheless, it is appalling how political and unjust this particular case is in the early 21st century -- and Rove's fingers are all over it.