Remember when Greg Norman had like a 100 stroke lead over Nick Faldo in the 96 Masters, and he bungled it? Well it turns out that the prosecution in the Moussoui trial is trying to challenge Norman title as greatest choke artist of all time.
Yesterday the judge in the Moussoui trial stopped proceedings to investigate that charge that the the prosecution had been coaching at least four witnesses. This coaching included giving witnesses actual pieces of evidence, trial testimony, and perhaps classified information--something that the judge expressly forbade.
This is the second time that the judge has had problems with the head prosecutor, David Novak, who last week asked a question that the judge had overruled. And the dual issues could lead to the judge taking the death penalty off the table.
I'm still not sure how the case is looking right now, but it would be a gross bungling of the prosecution if Moussoui is convicted and execution was taken off the table, because they failed to follow procedure. Personally I'm opposed to the death penalty except in rare, rare exceptions, this being one of them. It seems pretty obvious that he knew 9/11 was going to occur and his silence led to the attacks. Now if we can just prosecute this case with more competency that the way we fought the Iraq war, he should be in his grave by summer. You shouldn't have to be Tiger Woods to get the win here.
2 comments:
This wasn't Novak's fault. Some second-string TSA lawyer is actually the one who emailed transcripts to witnesses with suggestions as to how to address perceived weaknesses in the case. Since the U.S. Attorneys are the ones who brought this to light, I think it's safe to say this happened w/o their knowledge or approval.
They're responsible because it was their witnesses, of course, but lawyers at that high a level really shouldn't need "witness sequestration" explained to them, and I don't fault the U.S. Attorney for thinking the TSA lawyers were smarter than gravel.
Thanks for the clarification...
Post a Comment