Masvidal was represented by Joe DeMaria, who was able to get his client's name cleared. Although OPR concluded that his conduct was "reckless," the Justice Department let him keep his job:
Five years after unsuccessfully targeting two prominent Miami figures — one a banker, the other a lawyer — in separate cases, a Justice Department prosecutor faces a July disciplinary trial by Maryland Bar regulators.Indeed.
John W. Sellers left the Justice Department in 2010 amid an internal probe concluding that he committed “reckless” misconduct in a money-laundering case against Miami-based American Express Bank International, which was headed by banker Sergio Masvidal.
***
Masvidal’s Miami lawyer, Joseph DeMaria, said the Justice Department should have fired Sellers after concluding that he had committed reckless misconduct, according to the agency’s internal probe in 2010.
Sellers now works as a Treasury Department attorney on the federal bailout program for the banking industry.
“The Justice Department let him sneak out the back door to the Treasury Department so he could keep his same salary, benefits and pension,” DeMaria said. “And now he’s working as an attorney on the federal bailout. How ridiculous is that?”
The article ends with this quote from Ben: “Lawyers reap what they sow. He will need to answer for his own conduct.” But prosecutors who engage in misconduct rarely have to answer for their conduct. That's part of the problem. OPR rarely does anything, and the few times it does do something, it's a slap on the wrist. See, e.g., Ted Stevens' prosecutors.
In this case, the Maryland Bar has initiated a case against Sellers, so it will be interesting to see what happens. (Here's the Maryland complaint). The problem is that even when the Bar tries to disclipline prosecutors, DOJ claims that they are immune even from Bar rules, and of course, civil remedies are not available.
