Thursday, February 27, 2020

"They want me to lie. They’re yelling at me.”

That was Rick Singer, the ringleader and main snitch in the Varsity Blues case describing what the case agents wanted him to do.  That should make your blood boil of course.  But the cover-up by prosecutors is just as bad, not disclosing this obvious Brady material until after twenty of the defendants have already pleaded guilty and served their time. It's just outrageous.

From the NY Times:
Since the mastermind of the college admissions scandal, William Singer, pleaded guilty last March to racketeering and other charges, he has been mostly offstage, paddleboarding and enjoying the California sun while many of his former clients head off to prison.

But this week, Mr. Singer, who admitted to organizing a scheme to cheat on tests and bribe college coaches to get students into elite schools, was again the center of attention. Lawyers for the actress Lori Loughlin and other parents said that notes Mr. Singer had taken while cooperating with federal investigators showed that they pushed him to lie to incriminate his clients.

They said that Mr. Singer’s own words suggested that parents did not knowingly engage in a conspiracy to bribe coaches, as prosecutors have argued, and they accused prosecutors of sitting on the evidence for months in violation of their legal obligations.

“Loud and abrasive call with agents,” Mr. Singer wrote on Oct. 2, 2018, in a note with several typos and misspellings. “They continue to ask me to tell a fib and not restate what I told my clients as to where there money was going - to the program not the coach and that it was a donation and they want it to be a payment.”

He added that the agents were essentially “asking me to bend the truth.”

In a hearing on Thursday, a federal judge called the allegations of prosecutorial misconduct “very serious” but did not rule on the issue, directing the parties to submit further motions.

Ms. Loughlin’s lawyers had written in a court filing on Wednesday that the evidence in Mr. Singer’s notes was “devastating to the Government’s case and demonstrates that the Government has been improperly withholding core exculpatory information, employing a ‘win at all costs’ effort rather than following their obligation to do justice.”
I previously wrote about how prosecutors were trying to bully Aunt Becky into pleading guilty.  Turns out they were doing much worse!

So what will happen now? The judge took various motions under advisement.  But the sad truth is that the likelihood that anything will happen to the prosecutors or agents who engaged in this misconduct -- or to the case itself -- is very low.  The right result would be to issue severe sanctions, including dismissal.  That's the only way that we are going to stop prosecutorial misconduct, which is a real problem for the criminal justice system.

The judiciary exists to act as a check on the executive branch.  But unfortunately we don't see much of that at all when it comes to misconduct. Instead, we hear: don't do that again; it wasn't intentional; there was no prejudice; it was harmless; and so on. So prosecutors and agents keep doing it.

At sentencings every day in every courtroom around the country, we hear about deterrence and why severe sentences are needed.  Let's be consistent with prosecutorial wrongdoing.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Agree wholeheartedly. The judiciary acts as a backstop to protect rogue prosecutors.

Anonymous said...

Misconduct will continue to go unpunished until somebody pushes a judge into holding the gov’t feet to the fire.

Why don’t you do something about it and set an example?

Anonymous said...

Of course, if a defense attorney were nailed submitting doctored evidence or suborning perjury, he/she would be eating baloney sandwiches while sporting the latest in khaki fashoinwear.

Anonymous said...

"The right result would be to issue severe sanctions, including dismissal."

The right result, if true, is dismissal, disbarment, and perhaps a term of prison for the prosecutors. Seriously.

If I call the police and make a false report of criminal conduct to get someone unjustly put in jail, that's a crime. What prosecutors do when they abuse criminal process and push witnesses to lie is worse. Prosecutors are responsible for upholding the rule of law and seeking punishment for those who violate it. When they (and cops) themselves violate the rule of law, their offense is worse, and their punishment should be worse too.

Anonymous said...

7:51 is an early contender for most ignorant comment of the year. The owner of this blog was the victim of egregious prosecutorial misconduct. The trial judge agreed and imposed sanctions. The court of appeals, acting as governmental protector, then reversed. On remand, the newly assigned judge, again protecting the government, whitewashed the whole matter.

There have been several examples of prosecutorial misconduct over the last few years that defense lawyers have pushed. The judges, by and large, protect prosecutors.


Anonymous said...

Yes let's lose our mind when white people are treated unfairly.

Anonymous said...

Why do we consider Possibly doctored notes of a snitch to be Gospel? Why didn’t he speak up sooner? You guys Will hit your trailer to any truck going by.

Anonymous said...

Doctored is rich. Only one of the two parties to those conversations actually choose not to record them so there can be no record, and it isn't the defendant who would be breaking the law if he did it secretly.

Anonymous said...

Sure ‘Shaigan’ was bad, but here have been other cases and the urge to sweep it under the table is strong.

‘Copygate’ got dropped, Magistrate report on ‘Esformes’ case was tossed aside by the Judge.

The Bar would be all over defense counsel, why does it refuse to supervise Prosecutors?

Rumpole said...

www.freeauntbeckynow.com

Anonymous said...

One of the reasons prosecutorial misconduct goes unchecked is because most of our bench is made up of former prosecutors.

Anonymous said...

@11:47

Basically, your position is snitches aren't reliable. So, we can't rely on them when they snitch on prosecutors. Notwithstanding that fact, we should convict defendants based on the word of the very same snitches.

You can't have it both ways.

Anonymous said...

Prosecutors can have it anyway they want it

Bill Gelin said...

Hi DOM,

I'm writing to ask your Broward based attorney and judicial readers to support my candidacy for the Board of Governors of the Florida Bar.

Many know me from my work on JAABLOG, and if I'm elected, I will fight for change and reform of the Bar, particularly regarding the arbitrary and inefficient disciplinary system which seems to focus more on attacking sole practitioners rather than aggressively weeding out the politically connected bad apples that give lawyers everywhere a bad name.

Voting is underway. The link I posted below lets lawyers vote with essentially one click.

I thank you and everyone else in advance, and promise to fight just as hard for fairness as a board member as I have for equal justice and accountability in the Broward courthouss these many years.

Bill Gelin

https://www.esc-vote.com/flabar/

Anonymous said...

I think your are missing the bigger point --
Aunt Becky is guilty as sin.
Just check out S2,E3 of FH at about the 10:15 mark
Mary-Kate and Ashley know hat I'm talking about.