What did Eliot Ness' Capone indictment look like?

[jmowreader]

Fans of The Untouchables know that Al Capone got sent up for tax evasion.

Fans of Eliot Ness know that tax evasion wasn't the only thing Ness' sleeve; he was prepared to throw Volstead Act violations, murder charges and fiscal crimes against Capone if the tax evasion case didn't send Capone to prison.

This is in GD:Leak because it applies to the Scooter Libby indictment.

Let's go off on a wild supposition and assume Fitzgerald is a competent prosecutor--we know this to be true, so we're okay so far. We can also assume Fitzgerald, after investigating Rove, Libby and the rest, knows how bad of scumbags these people are.

Could Fitzgerald have written his indictment in the way that he did and for the crimes that he chose because he needed a fallback? Something even better to try him on if the five counts he charged him with don't put Scooter Libby in prison?

I also think he indicted only Libby for three reasons: the psychological effect it will have on the targets (you know the whole White House is sitting there thinking "is he coming after me next?"), the complexity of trying multiple complex cases simultaneously, and the psychological effect it will have on the rank-and-file Repug. The second is most important: if he has to work Libby, Rove and Cheney, plus prepare a case to take to Congress justifying the impeachment of Bush, something's going to get screwed up. If, on the other hand, his trial staff gets conviction on Libby before they start working on Rove, they'll be able to focus only on convicting Libby...not simultaneously convicting three people and impeaching one.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Fitzgerald isn't political. He will charge only those crimes

that he believes the evidence will support. Libby was indicted only because the grand jury found probable cause with respect to the crimes of perjury and obstruction of justice. Likewise, Rove and others will be indicted only if there is sufficient evidence to support the charges. And that's the way it should be. Much as I loathe Rove, he should be charged with a crime ONLY if there is evidence he committed it -- and not because he's an evil Republican slimeball. Fitzgerald respects the law, and so should we. We have to, or we're just as bad as they are.

There's a great scene from a wonderful movie, "A Man for All Seasons," which won a bunch of Oscars in 1966. It's about Thomas More, a lawyer who defied Henry VIII and was executed for it.

More: The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal.

Roper: Then you set man's law above God's!

More: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact - I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of the law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God....

Alice: While you talk, he's gone!

More: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law!

Roper: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law!

More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

Roper: I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you - where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast - man's laws, not God's - and if you cut them down - and you're just the man to do it - d'you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake.