mt:Include module="Global Settings" /> Federal Perjury Archives: Colorado Criminal Lawyer Blog

Recently in Federal Perjury Category

July 3, 2011

Federal Prosecutors Punished for NOT Investigating Veracity of Snitch Witnesses

The Seventh Circuit this week admonished the United States Attorney's office for failing to investigate the truthfullness of a "cooperating witness" in the face of obvious false testimony.

The Seventh Circuit on June 17 decided a drug case that will have application to ALL criminal cases, including white-collar cases.

In the appellate decison of United States v. Freeman, 09-cr-4043, 2011 WL 2417091 (7th Cir., June 17, 2011), the Seventh Circuit granted a new trial on the grounds that the Federal prosecutors presented testimony of a key cooperating witness on the stand who they knew or at least should have known was lying.

The criminal defense lawyer was on target when he sent the prosecutors a letter detailing his concerns after reading the grand jur testimony challenging key aspects of the cooperating witnesses participation in the actual conspiracy charged in the case.

The US Attorney's office did not investigate the challenges made by the defense lawyer who later testified falsely. Unbelievbly the witness was in JAIL when the witness claimed to be participating in the underlying conspiracy.

The Court Said:

"[T]he governing principle is simply that the prosecutor may not knowingly use false testimony. This includes "half-truths" and vague statements that could be true in a limited, literal sense but give a false impression to the jury."

H. Michael's Take

This caas imposes a clear duty on the part of federal prosecutors to investigate plausible allegations that a government witness's expected testimony was false.

"[I]t is obvious that when the government received the letter from [the defendant's] attorney, it knew there were problems with [the witness's] testimony - problems it should have cleared up well before [the witness] was allowed to testify . . . .

[W]hen the government learns that part of its case may be inaccurate, it must investigate. It cannot simply ignore evidence that its witness is lying. Here, the government abdicated its responsibility by failing to investigate . . . .(Citations omitted.)"

Federal prosecutors swollow whole the stories told by "helpful" cooperating witnesses,

These witnesses often tell the prosecutors whatever they want to hear based on what is needed in the target's case.

These witnesses often are the first to "flip." Agreeing to testify immediatley without these are the witnesses whose "stories" should be checked out before deals are made.

Prosecutors too often ignore massive evidence of the obvious lies and inconsistencies in the proferred testimony.

Criminal defense attorneys should ALWAYS disclose - even if it is tactically questionable - mistakes and inconsistencies in the testimony of cooperating witnesses. If they make their record prior to trial - giving the prosecutor an opportunity to invesitgate these allegations -- and there is no good faith investigation that follows up -- they have "protected the record' for appeal should thse lawyers lose the case at trial.

December 3, 2010

The High Cost of Too Much Cooperation - "Helpful Witnesses"

Federal authorities on Thursday dropped their prosecution of a southern California man charged with two felonies for modifying Xbox 360 consoles, following a severe berating by a judge and an admission they made procedural errors, Wired.com reported.

The criminal trial against 28-year-old Matthew Crippen was the first to test how anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act applied to game consoles. The 1998 law prohibits the hacking of technology intended to prevent access to copyrighted material. Matthew Crippen of Anaheim, California, was arrested in 2009 [1] on charges related to modifications he made to the optical disc drives of two Microsoft consoles

According to Wired.com, which was providing gavel-to-gavel coverage of the trial, opening statements were delayed on Wednesday after US District Judge Philip Gutierrez blasted prosecutors for a series of missteps. They included alleged unlawful behavior by government witness Tony Rosario, who secretly videotaped Crippen as he accepted $60 to modify an Xbox. The judge also lashed out at prosecutors' proposed jury instructions that he said were harmful to the defense.

"I really don't understand what we're doing here," Gutierrez was quoted as telling prosecutors.

The government responded by asking for a recess, but later pressed on with the case.

On Thursday, Rosario, an undercover agent for the Entertainment Software Association, testified that during his 2008 meeting with Crippen, the hacker inserted a pirated video game into the modified console, a key detail in the prosecution that had never been aired before. After defense attorneys objected, the prosecution admitted they first became aware of the new claim on Sunday but had failed to alert Crippen's defense team.

Assistant US Attorney Allen Chiu then agreed to dismiss the charges in light of the omission and "based on fairness," Wired.com reported.


H.Michael's Take

The federal criminal justice system relies, at times, on "paid for" testimony of witnesses with little or no credibility. Despite the best efforts of - what I consider to be - ethical prosecutors -- the culture of "cooperation" will lead to witnesses wanting to be so helpful they will slant their testimony or even intentionally "filll gaps" in the DA's or US Attorney's case that are obvious weaknesses. Even veteran federal agents and seasoned detectives find this somewhat tempting.

The price - of course - is damage to the entire system of justice and dismisal of the case based on "justice." Here the US prosecutor had no choice and did the ethical thing.