http://images.dailykos.com/...
Governor Don Siegelman held every other State-wide Office in Alabama prior to being elected governor in a very Red state. He was a rising star on the National Democratic scene, being mentioned as a future DNC candidate for President or Vice-President.
Early in his term, Governor Siegelman, as he had promised the citizens of Alabama during his campaign, instituted a strong push for a state-wide lottery with the proceeds going to provide a free college education to worthy high school students who otherwise would not be able to pay the costs of attending. He set up a non-profit foundation to promote the lottery, which had to be approved by the voters.
Governor Siegelman was first investigated by Alabama's Attorney General, an investigation begun immediately upon him assuming office. This highly-publicized inquiry resulted in no State charges. However, the investigation was the basis for Don's subsequent indictment in the Northern District of Alabama on corruption charges. Federal Judge U.W. Clemon dismissed the indictment during the U.S. Attorney's presentation of the government case. Judge Clemon has said that the prosecution of Don was the worst miscarriage of justice in his 29 years on the federal bench.
Governor Siegelman was then indicted in the Middle District of Alabama by U.S. Attorney Laura Canary, the wife of Don's opponent''s campaign manager in his re-election bid, who had earlier promised Karl Rove that "his girls" would take care of Governor Siegelman.
U.S. District Judge Mark Fuller, who you may know as the serial wife-beating judge now in the news with calls for his resignation and impeachment presided over Don's trial. Judge Fuller was a political enemy of the Governor, who, while Attorney General had investigated Fuller, then a local District Attorney, for fraudulent misappropriation of State Retirement funds. During the trial, Judge Fuller's private firm was awarded millions of dollars in federal contracts by the Bush Administration.
The chief witness against him was facing felony charges for soliciting bribes while a State Official. He was promised a recommendation of no jail time if he testified against the Governor. His testimony was coerced and untruthful. He was interviewed by the DOJ attorneys a reported 70 times before he "got it right" and gave a written statement along with his promise to testify.
The issue in the case was whether Don was guilty of taking a bribe in exchange for re-appointing the donor to a non-paying state hospital review board that he had served on under the 3 preceding governors, 2 Republican and 1 Democrat. Existing U.S. Supreme Court decisions had established a "quid pro quo" standard to be applied in political contribution cases. This standard required direct (not circumstantial) proof that the donation to a non-profit Educational Lottery was offered in exchange for the provision of a government benefit to the donor. No allegation nor proof was made that Governor Siegelman received any personal benefit from the openly disclosed contribution.
In his jury instructions, Judge Fuller charged the jury that they could find Don guilty based on an inferred (circumstantial) proof of the required quid pro . After the jury deadlocked, Judge Fuller gave them a "dynamite charge" that left the jury with little option but to convict.
Governor Siegelman is now serving an 8 year sentence on his conviction. His last appeal was recently denied by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, on which the Alabama Attorney General who first investigated Don now sits.
His supporters are petitioning President Obama for a full pardon. In support of this push a documentary, "Killing Atticus Finch, the Don Siegelman Story", showing the extreme injustice of his prosecution, is in the process of being filmed. The extremely compelling trailer may be viewed and a contribution to its completion made at www.gofundme.com/donsiegelmanfilm.
For more information on this injustice, go to www.Free-Don.org, where numerous interviews by national media, articles of renowned legal scholars in national publications, the coverage of his case by 60 Minutes, the Rachael Maddow Show, Time Magazine, CBS and others can be viewed as well the supportive statements of both conservative pundits, including George Will, and progressives like Thom Hartman. Support for the man that the National Trial Lawyers Association and Al Gore have called "America's political prisoner" is impressive. Most impressive is the Amicus Brief filed on Don's behalf in the U.S. Supreme Court by 113 bi-partisan former and then present State Attorney Generals, arguing Don's complete innocence.
Don, while in prison, has been spending his available time assisting fellow inmates and lobbying members of Congress, the media, prominent political players and members of social media to stop Mass Incarceration and for criminal justice reform.
His recent article, "Balancing the Scales of Justice" follows:
Follow Don and his case at @DonSiegelman on Twitter and on his Facebook page, Free Don Siegelman.
http://images.dailykos.com/...
Dear Friends,
The recent denial of my appeal underscores the need for us to keep fighting for change.
The fact that what I did wasn't a crime until the judicial decision that sent me to prison is an anomaly in American Jurisprudence. Unfortunately, recent efforts by the Innocence Project and The Equal Justice Initiative have proven that many innocent people have been convicted and at least one executed.
For too long, our system has been driven by a mass incarceration mandate created by our "Wars" on drugs and crime, a "Get tough on crime","Lock'em up and throw away the key" mentality that has led to the U.S. having the largest prison population the world has ever known.
Here is one reason why: The U.S. Solicitor General argued to the U.S. Supreme Court that:
"U.S. Citizens do not have a constitutional right not to be framed."
(January 4, 2010, reported by the Los Angeles Times, January 5th, 2010)
This damning pronouncement by the President's lawyer came in a case where two men had spent twenty-five years in prison for a crime they didn't commit. They were suing Iowa law enforcement for civil damages for willfully and intentionally framing them. Iowa law enforcement had made a deal with a felon that he would get a light sentence if he would testify against the two men.
That's what happened in my case. The government's key witness, Nick Bailey, described by CBS's Scott Pelly as a "crook", was told by prosecutors that they would recommend "no time in prison" if he would say what needed to be said. The witness told CBS 60 Minutes that he was made to write his proposed testimony over and over until he got his story straight. (CBS 60 Minutes, 2/24/08)
A paralegal working for the Department of Justice filed a formal whistleblower complaint telling the U.S. Attorney General that she witnessed the prosecutors pressuring the witness and cajoling him to get him to say what the prosecutors wanted. She produced emails to support her claims.
Instead of bringing her and the exculpatory evidence forward, the prosecutors and the Department of Justice had her fired. They refuse to release information to this day.
Unfortunately, this use of felons to produce false testimony to get convictions is common place in U.S. courts.
My point is the fight for justice is much bigger than just me and my case.
The President has the power to make things right. He can issue pardons and shorten sentences but he can also change the mandate from one of an insatiable appetite for convictions to a mandate seeking the truth and justice. The President appoints the Attorney General, the Solicitor General, all federal judges and all U.S. Attorneys. He sets the policies for what happens in our justice system.
The President has the power to balance the scales of justice.
One question we should ask ourselves when considering who to support for President in 2016 is:
"Will this person, as President, reset America's moral compass?"
The fight for freedom and the struggle for justice needs you!
Don
http://images.dailykos.com/...