Cops and Courts

First, Locke lied under oath, according to the judge’s certitude. Then, it was revealed that prosecutors concealed evidence from the defense that could have used on cross-examination to show that the corporate insider had naked biases against W.R. Grace (Locke has a pending lawsuit for wrongful termination, which has been quashed by the company’s bankruptcy).

When it was determined that Locke would again take the stand and resume cross-examination, Molloy had to explain to jurors why the government would not have a second chance to examine the witness, a tactic known as re-direct.

Here’s the instruction he drafted. His honor doesn’t mince words:

“In this case, the Department of Justice and the United States Attorney’s Office have violated their constitutional obligations to the defendants, they have violated the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and they have violated orders of the Court.

“The United States Supreme Court has determined that when a defendant is on trial in the federal court, prosecutors have a constitutional obligation to turn over to the defendant evidence that is favorable to the accused either because it is exculpatory or because it is impeaching, that is, the proof may provide information that undermines the credibility of any witness called by the prosecution in the case.

“The government and its agents cannot suppress any such proof either willfully or inadvertently. The rules of criminal procedure place an obligation on the government and its agents, to produce certain kinds of evidence or proof if it is requested by the defendants or ordered by the court.”

Read the instruction to jurors in its entirety (Judge Molloy did).

Filed under: Uncategorized by admin