“Obvious” Obstruction Of Justice Accusation UnclearYesterday we promised to check out the obstruction of justice accusation a prosecutor launched at jailed former Gov. Don Siegelman (D-AL).
It’s a puzzling accusation, as the AP’s report made clear. Was assistant US attorney Steve Feaga pointing to Siegelman’s media campaign of claiming his case was politically motivated? Feaga said Siegelman and his co-defendant (who have both been convicted of corruption charges) are “reaching out from their jail cells” trying to sway events. When asked for specifics, Feaga said “it should be obvious to anyone who has been paying attention.”
Randall Eliason, a former prosecutor for the US Attorney’s office in Washington, DC, told me the obstruction of justice charge is probably not related to Siegelman’s PR campaign. Eliason said a prosecutor must show there is a pending proceeding in order to establish obstruction.
“It’s pretty unlikely that the allegation would be that they are obstructing their own case by talking to the media,” Eliason told me. Siegelman is waiting on an appeal, but Eliason said the appeal proceedings will be based on the trial record, not subsequent media coverage.
Another possible theory is that Siegelman is intimidating witnesses, lying to investigators or engaging in any other qualifying act to obstruct another investigation. The AP story hints at this possibility:
During the hearing, Feaga also said prosecutors had “reached out” to Siegelman within the last six weeks seeking information that could lead to charges or convictions against other people in other cases. Siegelman refused to cooperate, he said.
Of course, refusing to cooperate isn’t the same as obstruction of justice (see the Fifth Amendment). So what’s going on? For now, we’re stumped. Faega said this will all become even “more obvious” in the coming months.
