Harpers: The Pork Barrel World of Judge Fuller (GOV SIEGELMAN'S JUDGE)

[mod mom]

The Pork Barrel World of Judge Mark Fuller
>
>BY
>Scott Horton
>PUBLISHED
>August 6, 2007
>
>For the last week, we’ve been examining the role played by
>Judge Mark Everett Fuller in the trial, conviction, and
>sentencing of former Alabama Governor Don E. Siegelman. Today,
>we examine a post-trial motion, filed in April 2007, asking
>Fuller to recuse himself based on his extensive private
>business interests, which turn very heavily on contracts with
>the United States Government, including the Department of
>Justice.
>
>The recusal motion rested upon details about Fuller’s personal
>business interests. On February 22, 2007, defense attorneys
>obtained information that Judge Fuller held a controlling
>43.75% interest in government contractor Doss Aviation, Inc.
>After investigating these claims for over a month, the
>attorneys filed a motion for Fuller’s recusal on April 18,
>2007. The motion stated that Fuller’s total stake in Doss
>Aviation was worth between $1-5 million, and that Fuller’s
>income from his stock for 2004 was between $100,001 and $1
>million dollars.
>
>In other words, Judge Fuller likely made more from his
>business income, derived from U.S. Government contracts, than
>as a judge. Fuller is shown on one filing as President of the
>principal business, Doss Aviation, and his address is shown as
>One Church Street, Montgomery, Alabama, the address of the
>Frank M. Johnson Federal Courthouse, in which his chambers are
>located.
>?Annual report details, Doss Aviation, 2002
>
>Doss Aviation, Inc. (motto: “Total Quality Service Isn’t
>Expensive, It’s Priceless”) and its subsidiary, Aureus
>International, hold contracts with a number of government
>agencies. Quoting from defense counsel’s motion for recusal
>(emphasis in the original):
>
>Doss Aviation, Inc. has been awarded numerous federal military
>contracts from the United States government worth over
>$258,000,000, including but not limited to: An August 2002
>contract with the Air Force for $30,474,875 for Helicopter
>Maintenance, a November 2003 contract with the Navy for
>$5,190,960 for aircraft refueling, a February 2006 contract
>with the Air Force for over $178,000,000 for training pilots
>and navigators, and a March 2006 contract with the Air Force
>for $4,990,541.28 for training at the United States Air Force
>Academy. The February 2006 contract with the Air Force for
>over $178,000,000 is for 10 ½ years, but is renewable from
>year to year . . .
>
>-snip
>http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/08/hbc-90000762

EVERYONE INTERESTED IN THE GOV SIEGELMAN CASE SHOULD READ THIS EXCELLENT PIECE BY SCOTT HORTON ON THE JUDGE WHO OVERSAE THE CASE!

[mod mom]

1. Did you know the RICO statute was unjustly used in Siegelman's case:

The third question is why the prosecution was permitted to use the Racketeer-Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) as the basis for its case against Siegelman. RICO was developed in the late 1960s to provide prosecutors more reach to fight organized crime. The use of this statute in cases involving political corruption charges is problematic for a number of reasons, among them because it begins a process of marking government functions as organized crime—which in itself undermines public confidence in government. As Harvard’s Arthur Maass said, applying RICO in such cases is “unauthorized, out of control, and overall questionable.” For this reason, it has often been urged that the RICO statute be used extremely sparingly, if at all, in political cases. Procedures are in place which limit its use and require approval at a very high level in the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. In the Siegelman trial, the essence of the prosecution’s case was what Notre Dame law professor G. Robert Blakey, a former prosecutor who wrote the RICO statute, calls the “trashcan theory of prosecution.” The prosecution’s case was, essentially, a dog-and-pony show: countless facts were presented, and the jury was asked to see corruption behind every deed. As Alexander Hamilton once observed, when a prosecutor makes enough claims of wrongdoing against an innocent man, he is very likely to get a conviction on something. The use of RICO in this case is one of the telltale signs that the prosecution is politically motivated and driven. In fact, a former senior Justice Department lawyer who requested anonymity told me:

Congressional investigators need to probe into the process by which the RICO charges were brought in this case. I believe they will find a trail of politically incendiary decision-making in which established practices and procedures were cast to the wayside in a vendetta-like prosecutorial effort.

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/08/hbc-90000714

[Octafish]

2. 'He may have missed dinner in Alabama, but that doesn’t mean he missed out on pork.'

Wow! What an article!

The judge is a lousy son-of-bitching DEFENSE CONTRACTOR!

Thank you, mod mom.

[mod mom]

3. Thank YOU Octafish. Yep, Ole Judge Fuller is protecting the hand that feed him

[libnnc]

4. kick

:kick:

[lonestarnot]

5. kick!

[Canuckistanian]

6. kick!

And off you go...

[EFerrari]

7. Kick

[Oilwellian]

8. And the plot thickens...

wow...just wow.

K&R

[AmandaRuth]

9. Just how does any judge become rich enough to buy 43% of a company

big enough to do helicopter maintenance and jet refueling for the air force and navy. Maybe the good judge's finances should be looked at a little closer.

[tsuki]

10. Kick.

[Lucinda]

11. Thanks! I was planning to do a little research on this guy after watching

coverage of Siegelman's situation this afternoon. You saved me a couple of steps! :hi: