SEPTEMBER 22 20081. Here's Proof That Siegelman Was Wrongly Convicted
2. Plot Thickens in Mississippi Senate Race
..............................................................................................................
1. Here's Proof That Siegelman Was Wrongly
Convicted
by Roger Shuler of Legal Schnauzer
....Citing McCormick v. U.S., 500 U.S. 257 (1991), Siegelman's
attorneys show that federal law requires proof of an explicit quid pro
quo for conviction in a public-corruption case. In short, an explicit
"agreement" or "promise" of favorable action is unlawful, but an
"expectation" of such a result is not.
Fuller's jury instruction did not make that distinction. On page 48 of
the appeal, Siegelman's team states: "The District Court advised
jurors that they could convict Gov. Siegelman upon finding that [he]
intended to alter [his] official actions as a result of the receipt of
campaign contributions or other benefits."
This, however, is not what the law says. The Siegelman team correctly
points out that the instructions did not require an agreement or
promise at all, much less an explicit one. "They allowed for conviction
based on attribution of a state of mind to Gov. Siegelman."
<link to source>
...............................................................................................................
2. Plot Thickens in Mississippi Senate Race
by Roger Shuler of Legal Schnauzer
....An indictment against Musgrove, which could come between now
and the November 4 election, probably would secure a victory for
Wicker. It also would raise questions about a number of criminal
investigations by the Bush DOJ that appear to be politically time and
motivated.
Most prominent among those cases is the prosecution of former
Alabama Governor Don Siegelman.
<link to source>
...................................................................................................................................................
| __________________________________________________________________________________________ Sponsored by Friends of Don Siegelman 2007 <feedback>________________________________________________________________________________ __________ |
.........................................................................
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |  |
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is posted without profit for those who have expressed interest in this
information for research and educational purposes. DonSiegleman.org has no affiliation whatsoever with the originators of these
articles nor is DonSiegleman.org endorsed or sponsored by the originator(s).
"Go to ..." and "more" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as
originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on this site may not match the versions our
readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.
information for research and educational purposes. DonSiegleman.org has no affiliation whatsoever with the originators of these
articles nor is DonSiegleman.org endorsed or sponsored by the originator(s).
"Go to ..." and "more" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as
originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on this site may not match the versions our
readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.
.........................................................................
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| SIEGELMAN APPEAL <PDF file> |
.........................................................................
| PROSECUTION RESPONSE <PDF file> |