The actions of former-District Attorney Mike Nifong in the Duke
University lacrosse case have put the problem of prosecutorial abuse
front and center for all Americans. Nifong, although a local
prosecutor, has become the poster boy of prosecutorial abuse on every
government level. With a story line that included sex, racial tensions,
and gender and income inequality, the Duke case captured the attention
of the media and the nation. We now know that Nifong willfully
disregarded evidence of the boys' innocence and thanks in large part to
enormous public attention and condemnation, he has been rightly stripped
of his badge and the keys to his office.
Similar attention is drawn to cases with strong partisan interest like
the obstruction of justice case against Vice President Dick Cheney's aid
Scooter Libby and the corruption case against Louisiana Democrat William
Jefferson, where public opinion is sharply divided but nevertheless
intense. Regardless of the merit if the case is sexy enough, the media
pay attention.
The same cannot be said for less popular cases. As a result, we are
moving toward a system where Constitutional rights of the accused are
guaranteed only to those deemed by television editors to be ready for
prime-time. In cases where the public interest is of lower intensity,
prosecutors seem to have almost free reign. One need only go to the
home district of the new Attorney General Michael Mukasey and Senate
Judiciary Committee member Sen. Charles Schumer, to demonstrate the
problem.
In USA v. Stein, Assistant United States Attorney Stanley Okula of the
Southern District of New York (SDNY) was one of the lead prosecutors in
a case against executives from accounting giant KPMG. At about the same
time, he also prosecuted three cases against members of the Tollman
family, a wealthy family based in Britain and Canada. Rather than a
made-for-Hollywood plot line, these cases lacked the sympathetic
defendants or partisan interests it seems are now needed to have ones
Constitutional rights guaranteed. Predictably, there was little noise
from the media and public about these cases, despite Okula being
criticized by the judges of three nations.