Thursday, July 15, 2010

The latest on the Don Siegelman case

Subject: The Latest on the Siegelman Case
From: Don.Siegelman@******.com
Date: Thu, July 15, 2010 10:10 am
To: "******** ******" ******@******.***


Dear ***********,


As many people have asked about the progress of my case, I’m writing to bring you


up-to-date.






**My Case was Vacated :** As you may know, last month the U.S. Supreme Court


vacated the judgment in my case and sent it back to the 11th Circuit Court of


Appeals “for further consideration” in light of the Skilling case. That case gutted


the so-called “Honest Services” statute, under which I also was charged (along with


bribery and obstruction of justice.)






**My Case will go back to the Court of Appeals**: We will have to wait to see what


the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals does. My lawyers, including the lead lawyer, Sam


Heldman, of Washington, DC, are hard at work preparing for briefing and oral


argument for the Appeal. If you have questions regarding the meaning of the Supreme

Court's decision please contact [Sam Heldman](mailto:sheldman&******.***)





**A Motion for a NEW TRIAL was filed:** Peter Sissman, also of Washington, DC, has


filed a motion for a new trial on the grounds of multiple instances of government


misconduct (due to Karl Rove's direction) that came to light after the trial.






**A second Motion for RECUSAL was also filed:** On June 29, Peter Sisman filed a


second motion, this one for recusal, asking the trial judge to disqualify himself


from the Siegelman case. The reason for this request is an April 2007 exparte - a


back-room private meeting - the judge had with U.S. Marshals and Postal Inspectors


in which they discussed matters which were pending before the judge in my case while


keeping the meeting and what was discussed a secret from my lawyers until May 14,


2010, **three years later!**






**This is illegal!** Peter Sisman stated:


* "The law required that the Trial Judge immediately inform defendants of any ex


parte meeting. He failed to live up to his obligation. Here, the Trial Judge’s


impartially can reasonably be questioned."


The Huffington Post has also published an article by Andrew Kreig providing further


information about this [here.](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-kreig/court-vacates-siegelman-c_b_629735.html.)









No comments: