Scott Horton: Attorney and Journalist

Journalist Scott Horton

Starting in June 2007, Scott Horton began to express alarm at the
corrupt prosecution of Don Siegelman in his online articles "No
Comment". Scott Horton is a New York attorney known for his work in
emerging markets and international law, especially human rights law
and the law of armed conflict. Horton lectures at Columbia Law
School. He is a contributing author at Harper's and other leading
print media as well as writing the Harper's blog.
.................................................................................................................................................
Scott Horton Speaking on 'Signs of Political
Prosecution'
Huntsville, AL April 2008
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
"Or perhaps I should quote my former partner and friend Michael
Mukasey in his recent speech in San Francisco, "A politically
motivated political corruption investigation is just corruption by
another name." Exactly.

Now, I started my review of the Siegelman case ... looking at a series
of questions that are used to flag political prosecutions. These
questions are in fact used by our Department of Justice and
Department of State. The are used in connection with determinations
as to whether or not assistance should be rendered to foreign
powers requesting help in connection with prosecutions involving
political figures. These are the questions used to determine whether
a prosecution is political and should receive support from the United
States.

1. Is the subject an opposition political figure?

2. Is the crime that has been charged something applied

uniformly, or does it seem to be used just on political

adversaries. And this is particularly the case when the crime as

charged deals with details of running campaigns.

3. When was the probe initiated and how did it come to be

initiated? Does it comply with established procedures and

rules governing investigations? Charges brought against

political candidates during an election cycle are particularly

suspect. And the golden rule is that prosecutors investigate

crimes, not people. So, what was the crime and how did it

come to the attention of the prosecutors?

4. Was an intrusive investigation conducted? That is, does

the investigative work appear geared to disrupting the political

figure's work, for instance, as a representative in the

legislature or a local official? Does it appear geared to

embarrassing a candidate for an election? Was the

investigation played out in the media? Was the arrest and

announcement of charges hyped in the media? Is the

allocation of resources and materials for the investigation and

prosecution "normal" or commensurate with similarly charged

crimes?

5. Is the trial open to the public? Is the presentation of

evidence open to the public? Was a gag imposed on

counsel? Did the prosecutors engage in questionable conduct

in picking a court and a judge? Was the defendant granted

freedom pending trial and appeal?

6. Is there a political tone to the prosecutor's presentation of

his case? Does he speak of a political party or movement as

"corrupt" rather than a specific individual? Is there evidence to

show that the prosecutor discussed the case with Government

figures outside of the chain of prosecutorial authority? Were

senior political figures exercising influence in the prosecution?

7. Was the defendant or his counsel the subject of

harassment, threats, robberies or break-ins?

8. Does the prosecution run parallel with a political campaign

which is being maintained by the Government or the

Government's party? Is the prosecution being cited as

evidence of "corruption" by the opposition? Does the

Government appear to have access to the prosecution's

evidence? Does it have prior knowledge that charges will be

brought? Is this information used for political purposes?

9. Does the media have prior knowledge of criminal

investigations, of charges brought, of evidence that will be

used? Does the media quote government officials or

prosecutors in connection with pending cases?

When I applied this test to the Siegelman case, it achieved a score
that was pretty much off the charts. In fact, I'd say, further off the
charts than most of the cases I'm used to studying in the former
Soviet Union."

<more>
...............................................................................................................................................

.........................................................................

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Sponsored by Friends of Don Siegelman 2007
<feedb ack>________________________________________________________________________________
__________

Scott Horton

You need Java to see this applet.

The Siegelman
Chronicles

Starting June 1, 2007, Scott
Horton has been following the
case of former Alabama
Governor Don Siegelman,
currently imprisoned on a
conviction of charges of
bribery, conspiracy and mail
fraud. Siegelman's case has
ramifications far outside of
Alabama. It connects to Karl
Rove, the Department of
Justice under Alberto
Gonzales, and to the
corruption of our news media
by political interests.

Horton's research is ongoing.

You can read more of it here.

"When I applied this test to the
Siegelman case, it achieved a
score that was pretty much off the
charts [for politically motivated
prosecution.] In fact, I'd say,
further off the charts than most of
the cases I'm used to studying in
the former Soviet Union."