Six of the government's proposed exhibits were derived from a draft of a book that Mr. Ring was writing.
EXHIBIT 60: Pages of book draft:
In this exhibit Ring described professional friendships and references and attempt to bribe a senator.
Discussion at the status hearing referred to a "JDA bribe" which all participants seemed to agree related to former Sen. John D. Ashcroft (R-Mo.) who later became attorney general. It was not entirely clear to the ACR Blog's Washington correspondent that the "JDA bribe" and the "attempt to bribe a senator" are the same event. U.S. District Judge Ellen S. Huvelle said that the book's bribe reference was vague. Even if there was an attempt to bribe a senator, it doesn't mean that Mr. Ring made the attempt. RESULT:
::
EXHIBIT 61: Pages of book draft, introduction:
Ring demonstrates his consciousness of guilt and motive. Among other things, Ring wrote that one purpose of the book was "to provide a cautionary tale about what can happen when you make a corrupt bargain for early success and money." Ring also described professional friendships in this exhibit.
The government viewed this as an admission of guilt. Discussion in court related to this exhibit also revealed that Mr. Ring wrote that he feared becoming "a felon at 36". Judge Huvelle said that the "corrupt bargain" was vague. Some acts, she said, could be unsavory or corrupt, but not necessarily illegal, therefore she wouldn't allow this exhibit to be admitted. The ACR Blog views the fear of becoming "a felon at 36" to refer to criminal activity. Most people do not refer to felonies without referring to actual crimes. We can not square the "felon at 36" comment with Judge Huvelle's statement that this exhibit may not be referring to criminal activity. RESULT: Inadmissible
::
EXHIBIT 62: Pages of book draft, "Jack things":
In this exhibit, Ring wrote about the coconspirators' lobbying strategy.
The ACR Blog has no information on this exhibit. RESULT: Unknown
::
EXHIBIT 63: Pages of book draft seized from Ring's computer, "Backup of Book Proposal.wbk"
[T]his exhibit demonstrates that this was in fact a book Ring was writing. Furthermore, Ring wrote that as a "professional lobbyist," his book would "provide better context for the Abramoff scandal and how the crimes of those involved compare and contrast with how business is done every day in Washington."
The government again thought this was an admission of guilt. Judge Huvelle said this was vague and that Mr. Ring may not have personally committed the crimes he mentioned. RESULT: Inadmissible
::
EXHIBIT 64: Pages of book draft seized from Ring's computer, "GT intro.doc"
No further information on this exhibit. Similar arguments as those made above. RESULT: Inadmissible
::
The government had already withdrawn the last book exhibit on the exhibit list, Exhibit 65 (Scandal in Context.docx). Please be aware that all exhibits may not appear on the exhibit list. The purpose of this hearing was to make determinations regarding exhibits that Mr. Ring objected to. The exhibit list includes a number of uncontested exhibits, but many sequential exhibit numbers don't appear on the list at all.
This entry is the first in a number of entries the ACR Blog plans to make on yesterday's status hearing. Don't assume that the government only faced setbacks in yesterday's hearing based on this sample alone. The government did score some key victories. If we ever had a chance to say something to Nathanial Edmonds, Michael Ferrara and all of the other prosecutors in this case, we'd tell them that we appreciate all the work that they do.
====================
1 The notes of the ACR Blog's Washington correspondent are not clear with respect to Judge Huvelle's decision.
0 comments:
Post a Comment