Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x2 - Hendon: I’m like the black Sarah Palin *** The serial fantasist strikes again, and other Daleypalooza news
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* Rod Blagojevich’s defense is arguing that his lone conviction ought to be thrown out…
Last month the jury deadlocked on 23 of the 24 counts faced by Blagojevich, convicting him only of making false statements during a 2005 interview in which the then-governor told an FBI agent that he was not involved in the details of fundraising.
“He noted that when he attends his events he becomes aware of some of those who are supporting him, but he does not track, or want to know, who is contributing or how much they are contributing to him,” the defense quoted the agent as recounting in his report of the interview.
The defense contended that Blagojevich’s comments to the FBI were taken out of context and that it was “common knowledge” that the governor would be included in fundraising discussions with his re-election bid the following year.
“And moreover, the Governor actually told the FBI agents that he was involved in fundraising during the very interview in question,” the defense motion said.
Keep in mind that the defense is quoting the agent. There could be plenty more there. I checked with the US Attorney’s office to see if the FBI report was online somewhere because I couldn’t find it. Here is the response…
No. It was not admitted into evidence at trial (which is not unusual)
So, I suppose the testimony by the agent was what did RRB in.
* Blagojevich attorney Sam Adam, Jr. said time and again during the trial that his client was “broke.” He could be…
Meanwhile, the filing revealed that the former governor is so cash-strapped that he can’t even pay for the transcripts from his own trial. Lawyers asked for permission to review the transcripts that they could not purchase.
“Prior to the end of trial, defendant’s fund from which his legal fees were paid was depleted, and as a result, Blagojevich has not been able to procure copies of the official transcripts from trial,” lawyers wrote.
Thoughts?
* No surprise here…
All of the charges against Doug Belkin, the Wall Street Journal reporter who was arrested while covering the Rod Blagojevich trial in July, were dismissed yesterday by a magistrate judge in U.S. Federal District Court.
Mr. Belkin faced two citations for “disturbance” and for “disobeying signs and directions,” according to a spokesman for the U.S District Attorney’s office.
Mr. Belkin was taken into custody at the Dirksen Federal Building in Chicago after he disobeyed orders from a security guard while attempting to interview one of the lawyers in the trial. “I told him three times to back up and he didn’t,'’ the security officer said at the time. “He put his hands on me.”
Security run amok. Yes, they need to keep some calm in the federal building, but it’s not a 1st Amendment Exclusion Zone.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 11:26 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x2 - Hendon: I’m like the black Sarah Palin *** The serial fantasist strikes again, and other Daleypalooza news
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I wonder how much one o Blago’s ties orsuits woul dbring on e-bay…. its hard for me to label somone cash strapped who has a half a million or so in clothes…
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 11:30 am
An agent’s report is not going to be admitted into evidence by the prosecution as it is not a substitute for testimony. The defense had access to it and could have used it for cross-examination and impeachment of the testimony, if there really is a gap between the report and testimony (but even then it generally wouldn’t be seperately admitted). This is a non-starter as an objection, and any such request should have been made at trial (and probably wasn’t).
As to his inability to pay for transcripts, I’m sure there’s a bunch of guys in Illinois prisons just bawling their eyes out over how little he got for his 2.8 million. If he really has a problem, it is with the Supreme Court not finding transcripts have to be provided in all circumstances to the accused, not his funding.
Comment by Berkeley Bear Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 11:39 am
So they called Zagel an “obstructionist” in preventing their cross-examinations.
If Zagel rules in their favor, does that mean that he admits that he was an “obstructionist” during the trial?
I don’t practice criminal law but throwing loaded words around in motions that may raise the hackles of the judge you are appearing before is risky business indeed.
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 12:13 pm
Berkeley Bear,
Do you (or anyone else) remember if the judge overruled any defense objections during the cross of the FBI agent, and were the objections during the defense’s efforts to provide context? If so, and if the report does indeed provide the context the defense claims, Roddy may have a point.
Comment by Cincinnatus Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 12:23 pm
Perhaps he held onto the copier key from Winston & Strawn, or maybe he can do some commercials for Kinko’s as a trade-out. Or Blago could just do some more TV appearances on Fear Factor, eat some bugs for cash or something. I have little sympathy for the man now. I suppose Zagel will have to have the feds comp Blago’s lawyers on the copies just to shut him up. For a convicted criminal, the little guy sure is a whiner.
Comment by Gregor Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 12:48 pm
Everybody criticizes blago for being a whiner, or being delusional, but I’m assuming that everybody knows that, when you are trying to stay out of prison, any strategy that achieves that end is ideal. Its like being in a fight with somebody much bigger and stronger than you. Do you fight dirty (bite, gouge eyes, etc…), or do you allow yourself to get pummeled so you dont get accused of being a dirty fighter? If you say you would get pummeled, you are lying.
Comment by anon Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 12:53 pm
I think if he agreed to cut the ribbon at the next Kinkos opening and croon a few Elvis songs they’d probably do the copies for free.
Comment by And I Approved This Message Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 12:59 pm
The FBI charge is Mickey Mouse beyond belief. Why is it a crime to lie to the FBI (not under oath) and not other law enforcement agencies?
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 2:28 pm
Word, I agree, and the fibies don’t tape the interviews, so there is nothing to question their “recollections”
Comment by steve schnorf Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 2:31 pm
Actually, word, it is a crime to lie to other federal investigators. EPA, for one.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 2:33 pm
Where are the droves of Blago’s friends, fans, and supporters and why aren’t they just writing a check for these transcripts?
Comment by Cheswick Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 2:50 pm
18 U.S.C. §1001 (in part):
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or
judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully -
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. . . .
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 2:56 pm
Ah… the question really is if Blago was taken out of context and did not lie to the Feds, isn’t it?
Comment by Cincinnatus Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 3:16 pm
Well, I just lost some of my respect for Steve Schnorf for his little comment. I assume he knows this information on taping because perhaps he was interviewed when his old boss George Ryan was on the way to jail? The bottom line is don’t lie to the feds - period.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 3:20 pm
Demoralized, that taping stuff is common knowledge. They won’t even let you tape your own interview. Daley had to get special permission to have a court reporter present.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 3:23 pm
My apologies to Mr. Schnorf on that point.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 3:24 pm
I just committed the “ready, fire, aim” mistake I hate so much in state government.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 3:25 pm
Word/Schnorf
Nobody made Rod sit down and talk to the fed’s. He did it on his own with full knowledge as a lawyer that it is better to remain silent than it is to lie.
Roger Clemmons has put himself in a similar situation with Congress and his alleged steroid/HGH use.
Comment by Leave a Light on George Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 4:44 pm
Leave, I have no sympathy for Blago, but it’s unrealistic to say that a sitting governor gearing up for re-election could refuse an FBI interview. Simply not possible, politically.
The feds have enough power without that hammer.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 5:01 pm
and George, the Clemens testimony is on video. My point was there is no defense except “he said, I said” when an FBI agent recalls your testimony differently than you do or says you lied
Comment by steve schnorf Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 5:16 pm
Once again, Schnorf is right.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 5:17 pm
And, to give the “he said, I said” defense, the defendant has to take the stand to personally refute what the agent says, and the defendant, not otherwise required to take the stand and be subject to cross, must thereby give up his 5th amendment rights
Comment by steve schnorf Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 5:33 pm
Once again Steve, Governor F-bomb had no obligation to talk to the feds. Once you talk your obligation is to tell the truth. A jury has decided he didn’t.
Word, the Gov could have made the political decision
to sit for the interview but choose not to answer certain questions. Suspects do that everyday.
Comment by Leave a Light on George Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 6:53 pm
I thought the FBI investigation was conducted in 2003? After the election?
Comment by Emily Booth Wednesday, Sep 15, 10 @ 7:40 pm
The FBI agent’s testimony was that he offered to have the interview taped and Mr. Blagojevich’s legal counsel refused. No one refuted that testimony and as far as I can tell, it was not challenged in cross examination.
Comment by FormerChicagoResident Thursday, Sep 16, 10 @ 8:18 pm