Where's Congress? Justice Dept. Whistleblower Slams Siegelman Prosecutors In OpEd News, Part II
By Andrew Kreig http://www.opednews.com/articles/Where-s-Congress-Justice-by-Andrew-Kreig-090917-490.html Part I* of this series described prosecution misconduct allegations by Tamarah Grimes, a paralegal with the Justice Department for six years in Alabama before she was fired in June. Her firing occurred June 9, eight days after she sent a letter to Attorney Gen. Eric Holder amplifying her 2007 allegations of misconduct by the prosecution in winning the conviction of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman on corruption charges. This exclusive interview for OpEd News continues with reporter Andrew Kreig, who recently also published an overall update on the Siegelman case here and a profile of Grimes here.** * http://www.opednews.com/articles/Explosive-OpEd-News-Interv-by-Andrew-Kreig-090915-223.html ** http://estrinlegaled.typepad.com/ Andrew Kreig: Tami, the Siegelman case was becoming the nation's most controversial federal criminal prosecution of the decade around the time you brought your internal complaints to DoJ in 2007. These controversies included a demand by the House Judiciary Committee for Karl Rove's testimony. The demand came after a sworn claim that his friend William Canary approached him to target the Democrat Siegelman to remove defendant from Alabama politics. Other reports tied Rove to a 2006 purge of U.S. attorneys to create additional "loyal Bushies" in these powerful posts. Many questions about the prosecution from outside experts included a CBS 60 Minutes report in February 2008 entitled, "Did Ex-Alabama Governor Get A Raw Deal?" It quoted a Republican co-chairman of John McCain's Presidential campaign as saying that Siegelman's prosecution was clearly political. You are a Republican, with extensive experience in litigation support. That included 18 years in the private sector before your six years with DoJ. What was DoJ's reaction to you and your concerns about potential misconduct by prosecutors in winning corruption convictions against Siegelman and co-defendant Richard Scrushy? Tamarah Grimes: I was referred for a criminal investigation by DoJ's Office of Inspector General, which we call "OIG." DoJ arbitrarily waived my right to confidentiality with the mediator, Sharon Stokes from Atlanta. What happened next? Then Mrs. Stokes and Rita Sampson, Assistant Director of the Executive Office for United States Attorneys EEO Staff, supposedly "neutrals" in the EEO process, began corresponding with DoJ's Office of Inspector General to push for a criminal investigation of me. Later, I discovered that Mrs. Sampson was no neutral at all. Mrs. Sampson formerly worked with the Executive Office's General Counsel and as former General Counsel for the FBI. On March 19, 2008, DoJ Special Agent Ronald Gossard of the Inspector General's office in Sharon Stokes' district of Atlanta requested that I be indicted on criminal charges arising from confidential discussions with the "neutral" mediator during an active mediation. The request was addressed to Assistant United States Attorney Melvin Hyde, Jr. in the U.S. Attorney's Office in Columbus, GA. That sounds serious, of course. I've checked with the Justice Department, which in essence says in boilerplate language that your firing was justified, but that it won't comment further in order to protect your privacy. Then what happened? I did nothing to justify termination. I was a loyal, exemplary employee with no discipline and many performance based awards prior to my complaints during the prosecution of the Scrushy/Siegelman matter. I do not know the basis for this attempted indictment. I filed requests under the Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy Act on June 30, 2009 to obtain the information. I have received nothing in response to my requests. The OIG's request for a criminal prosecution against me was declined by Mr. Hyde. On March 27, 2008, I was compelled to attend a Kalkines interview with Special Agent Gossard of OIG. Please describe a Kalkines interview. In the 1973 case Kalkines v. United States, the federal Court of Claims ruled that the federal government has the right to make its employees answer questions about their official duties so long as the government also grants the employee immunity from prosecution based upon that information. What happened next to you? I aggressively pursued information regarding my referral for criminal prosecution. I wrote many written requests over a three-month period previous to this, including a complaint filed with the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Civil Rights. Despite numerous requests for the information, my Kalkines interview was the first time I learned that the alleged basis for the selective attempted prosecution was, "Unauthorized disclosure of sensitive law enforcement information." Of course, there was no unauthorized disclosure on my part. My disclosures had been made through established whistleblower channels that were "safe conduits" intended for such reporting. Certainly, there could have been disclosures to strangers and persons sitting near Leura Canary and her group during the several hours spent in the lobby bar on November 1, 2007. Unable to obtain evidence to support the selective prosecution, Special Agent Gossard was not to be deterred. On May 16, 2008, he and his supervisor, OIG Special Agent Eddie Davis, went back to prosecutor Melvin Hyde and his boss, Sharon Ratley, Chief of the United States Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Georgia's Criminal Division. Why? To try to force a criminal indictment against me. The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Georgia again declined to proceed with an indictment against me due to lack of prosecutorial merit. I have issued requests under the Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy Act on June 30, 2009 to learn the specifics of the requested prosecutions or indictment. I have had no response to these requests. I am particularly interested in Special Agent Gossard's claims that prosecutor felt that I had committed a crime. Having never met Mr. Hyde, I would like to know the basis for that statement. CONT'D AT http://www.opednews.com/articles/Where-s-Congress-Justice-by-Andrew-Kreig-090917-490.html --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to Mark Crispin Miller's "News From Underground" newsgroup. To unsubscribe, send a blank email to [email protected] OR go to http://groups.google.com/group/newsfromunderground and click on the "Unsubscribe or change membership" link in the yellow bar at the top of the page, then click the "Unsubscribe" button on the next page. For more News From Underground, visit http://markcrispinmiller.com -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
