Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Oberweis vs. Foster
Next Post: Thompson: “Everybody should calm down about Zell”
Posted in:
* The way you read the standard overly-long Tribune story is to scan the first couple of paragraphs, skip over most of the “we’ve gone over this a hundred times before” background in the middle, then head right to the bottom, where some of the more interesting stuff always seems to get buried. It was no different in today’s story about Tony Rezko’s trial…
Also listed as witnesses were Susan Lichtenstein, the former top lawyer in the Blagojevich administration
Lichtenstein walked off the job and took almost her entire top staff with her. It’s been a mystery for years exactly why she left (nobody will talk for publication), but the word was that she and her staff may have been protesting an order from on high.
Maybe the mystery will finally be solved.
You can see other witnesses here.
* I told you about this late Friday, but let’s go over it again…
A judge on Friday ordered prosecutors in the Antoin “Tony” Rezko trial to steer clear of evidence intended to show that the longtime fundraiser for Gov. Rod Blagojevich manipulated the state hiring process.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Amy St. Eve, who will preside at Rezko’s trial when it opens Monday, also prevents prosecutors from seeking to demonstrate Rezko was behind large political contributions to Blagojevich from two members of a corrupt state hospital regulatory panel.
The setbacks for the prosecution, however, do not strike at the heart of its case — that Rezko allegedly exploited his influence with the governor to scheme to illegally siphon millions of dollars from the hospital board and a state pension panel.
I dunno about that last assertion. Those contributions were thought to be key evidence that something was smelled bad at the hospital board. The judge also ruled that prosecutors couldn’t pursue the connection between Rezko and state hiring. Prosecutors, you will recall, were planning to call Jennifer Thomas as one of their main witnesses. Thomas was an assistant to Joe Cini, the governor’s former patronage chief.
* And the jury pool? Ignorant, as usual…
Most prospective jurors said they read newspapers or watched TV news only sporadically. Few said they had followed news reports of the Rezko case.
* Meanwhile…
A Sangamon County judge is again ordering Gov. Rod Blagojevich to release copies of subpoenas from federal prosecutors.
But Judge Patrick Kelley said the release can wait until Blagojevich appeals to a higher court.
* More…
[After Kelley had initially ordered the subpoenas relased] Blagojevich administration lawyers then said they had uncovered new evidence and asked Kelley to reconsider. The “new evidence” was a letter from an assistant in U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald’s office asking that the administration not release the subpoenas because it “could impede the investigation … ”
“With two exceptions noted below, the U.S. Attorney’s Office continues to request that you not disclose the fact that the subpoenas have been served,” wrote Julie Rudner, assistant U.S. attorney. “Any such disclosure could impede the investigation and thereby interfere with the enforcement of law.”
Springfield attorney Don Craven, who represents the BGA, argued the letter said an investigation “could” be impeded, not that it would. He also maintained the letter did not constitute new evidence, and Kelley agreed, but added it would be “totally inappropriate” for the subpoenas to be released until the appeals process is completed.
So, we’re down to what “could” means? Full employment for lawyers.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Mar 4, 08 @ 4:40 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Oberweis vs. Foster
Next Post: Thompson: “Everybody should calm down about Zell”
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
This trial is already starting to smell bad and it hasn’t even gotten off the ground yet.
Comment by Tony's Hooka Tuesday, Mar 4, 08 @ 8:28 am
=== So, we’re down to what “could” means?==== not really, that is a red herring. FOIA does not apply to a federal investigation. But, most importantly, the US Attorney can have a subpeona it wishes to be kept confidential issued under seal. So if the US attorney needs a document to not be disclosed they have to go through the process of getting a Judge to agree it should be hidden, and issue it under seal. They did not. This is the standard please do not talk to anyone lanaguage. But there is no axctual prohibition or penalty if you do. Remeber Kelly’s question at the hearing about whether grand jury deponents can speak to the press? they can if their testimony has not been sealed. same thing.
along with Susan, Deb Golden also left around that time as well.
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Mar 4, 08 @ 8:44 am
Intereresting story over in the sj-r [Records: Union members named to board about time of donation] http://www.sj-r.com/News/stories/26319.asp
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Mar 4, 08 @ 9:37 am
Great description of the Tribune’s writing style Rich. Everything’s a New Yorker article.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Mar 4, 08 @ 10:31 am
It was my understanding that Boards and Commissions appointments and recomendations are still allowed to be discussed, but that front-line state hiring was not discussable. Thomas is still on the witness list which was published today.
Comment by Bud Man Tuesday, Mar 4, 08 @ 12:04 pm
just wait.
Comment by nino Tuesday, Mar 4, 08 @ 6:01 pm