Siegelman Prosecution Witness Implicated Others
An arrow in the quiver of those arguing that Don Siegelman has been selectively prosecuted is that Lanny Young’s allegations of illegal gifts to the former Democratic governor became a key part of the government’s case against Siegelman, but Young’s allegations that he gave thousands of dollars illegally to election campaigns for Republicans like Sen. Jeff Sessions and former Attorney General William Pryor were not prosecuted or even investigated.
Time.com lays it out today. In the article, Laurie Levenson, described as “a former assistant U.S. Attorney and a prominent expert in legal ethics at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles” says, “Certainly prosecutors would face a professional obligation to check out or verify the allegations in this case,” and adds, “Not doing so would represent a potential abuse of prosecutorial discretion.”
From the article:
The controversy surrounding the case in Alabama is not that Siegelman went to prison and his Republican colleagues didn’t. Without an investigation or even questions being asked, it’s impossible to know whether any of them committed illegal acts. The issue is that some of the same allegations that led to Siegelman’s indictment never merited so much as a follow-up when raised in connection with Republicans.
I know that many Alabamians are uninterested in the story and ready for it to go away, but the sense here is that the story is beginning to attract more attention, not less.
Related Articles:
Danny - I agree that this story probably has legs. It is believed that “60 Minutes” is also preparing a story on Siegelman.
Comment by anonymous — October 4, 2007 @ 1:43 pm
[…] UPDATE: I agree with Danny, this story is generating more interest, not less. Posted Alabama Politics on Thursday, October 4th, 2007. […]
Pingback by The World Around You » Blog Archive » TIME Breaks Big Siegelman Story - Sessions and Pryor Implicated in Illegal Behavior — October 4, 2007 @ 2:11 pm
The key question here is whether there was a quid pro quo. Otherwise, we’re probably talking about a misdemeanor. Young said he had a standing agreement with Siegelman’s administration to help each other out. Did Young have any such agreement with Pryor or Sessions? Or perhaps the question is whether they asked. In the end, though, none of the Young-related counts returned convictions. The jury didn’t believe his testimony.
Comment by K.W. — October 4, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
Claire Austin was Lanny Young’s business partner and she worked for both Sessions and Pryor–does that mean she was the bag man?
Comment by anonymous — October 4, 2007 @ 3:15 pm
Legs, this story has a millipede’s. Wonder if, “Don: a A Story of Redemption in Three Acts” will become a part of the rotation at ASF.
Comment by walt moffett — October 4, 2007 @ 3:16 pm
Ultimately Siegelman will not be redeemed - he is just too far gone. However, a number of other careers may go down in flames just like the Don’s.
Come on - did you expect a personality like Siegelman’s not to take others down with him?
Comment by Get Real — October 4, 2007 @ 3:25 pm
Didn’t Claire Austin admit on the stand that she was funneling money for Young? I believe she did.
Comment by Claire = Bagman — October 4, 2007 @ 7:28 pm
She did admit to being Eddie Curran’s secret source for most of the Press-Register stories.
Comment by K.W. — October 5, 2007 @ 9:31 am