Palfrey Update #32 -- AUSA Refuses to Testify.

Received an email from Ms. Palfrey's attorney Montgomey Sibley. Mr. Sibley writes:

AUSA Cowden Refuses to Appear and Testify at
November 28, 2007 Hearing


Greetings:


As a result of Judge Kessler order which set a hearing for Wednesday, November 28, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 26A of the federal courthouse in Washington D.C. on whether the injunction prohibiting Jeane's suit against a former escort should be dissolved, Jeane requested the appearance of AUSA William Cowden to testify upon the allegations he made under oath last March in order to obtain the temporary restaining order from Judge Kessler.

In response the government has stated: "“If you wish to present Mr. Cowden as a witness, you will need to subpoena him. We will oppose that subpoena.”

This remarkable statement continues the pattern of the government in this matter of refusing to release information, instead keeping the truth from being revealed.

Jeane has this day filed a motion with Judge Kessler asking her to order AUSA Cowden to appear at the hearing to answer questions under oath regarding his March 19, 2007, ex-parte application to Judge Kessler.

Commentary:

Now why would ASUSA Cowden refuses to testify since Mr. Cowden is a public servant and took an oath to abide by the law? On what grounds is Mr. Cowden refusing to testify? There has been certainly a lot of refusal to cooperate with Ms. Palfrey's defense team by the government. First, refusal to provide documents that will help Ms. Palfrey to defense her case and now a refusal by a public servant to testify. We certainly seen President Bush claiming executive privileges for certain White House employees when they are subpoened or invited by the House and Senate committee hearings.

On March 16, 2007, this is the same AUSA stated in a court order forbidding Ms. Palfrey from selling her phone records. And in February 1, 2007, Ms. Palfrey sent an email to the same AUSA an article that asked for his colleagues to closely look at the parallels in her case. The article was about Brandy Britton who was accused of running a prostitution business. Ms. Britton's case never went to trial because she committed suicide in January 2007.

Here is an excerpt of her email to AUSA Cowden:

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeanne Palfrey
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 10:25 AM
To: 'William.Cowden@usdoj.gov'
Subject: Jeane Palfrey (US vs. 803 Capitol Street)...

Dear Mr. Cowden… attached please find an article published in this Tuesday’s Baltimore Sun.

The parallels although not completely on-point with my case, are nonetheless sufficiently salient.

The piece here was forwarded to me by a concerned individual NOT to cheer me up (obviously), but to underscore via the attorney’s remarks the senselessness of my current dilemma, i.e. the tragic destruction/waste of a viable human being. Of course, I cannot and will not expand upon my position/defense in this correspondence without benefit of counsel. I understand the inappropriate nature of such an act. In fact, I fully appreciate the inappropriateness of this communiqué and equally comprehend your ethical duty to “report me” to both Mr. Sibley and Mr. Kramer (I am braced to deal with their wrath). However, before matters compound even more and perhaps irrevocably so, I must take this opportunity to ask that you and your colleagues take a very hard look from a moral stance, if none other at the matter at hand.More on the email.

While the prosecutor/attorney has no legal obligation to permit such witness to testify, a refusal to do so can create the appearance of unfairness. In the case of AUSA Cowden, he and the government are making themselves appear to be hiding something and being unfair to both sides. Justice can't be served without the fairness of both the government and the defense.

Update: In an email from Jason today, he is following up with a scoop that relates to Palfrey's case. So, stay tuned for the latest from Jason soon...