General Discussion

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)

65. They wanted to bar the transcript, because Risen could be called. I would expect no less from any

Wed Jan 28, 2015, 02:09 PM

Jan 2015

lawyer, prosecution or defense--when the witness is available, courts generally eschew prior testimony and call to the stand, as per the FRCP. There are only a few notable exceptions. That isn't something evil on part of the government....it's good and proper lawyering.

Now, I think the judge made a reasonable decision on 5th amendment grounds that precluded an appeal point for the defense, whilst still allowing for conviction.

FYI--it would not have been a disaster for the government for Risen to testify because the "lies and misinformation" aspects would have been excluded as not relevant. You really think that this particular judge was going to put up with Mr. Risen's nonsense?

As for the "real world" reporting on this..... you do realize that the "reality" of the situation for Mr. Sterling lies not in blog posts from common dreams but in the court papers? Specifically, the 9 count conviction sheet. He's facing life. And all the damn blog posts in the world ain't gonna change the law.

And let me be clear on this--this particular judge isn't going to come down on him for leaking.....but she will come down on him for being the case officer who betrayed his own agent.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

65 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Invisible Man: Jeffrey Sterling, CIA Whistleblower [View all] JEB Jan 2015 OP

whistleblowers are invisible at DU too. grasswire Jan 2015 #1

There's a contingent here who vilify whistleblowers relentlessly riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #3

kick bigtree Jan 2015 #2

It's not Sterling who should be heading to prison, but his former bosses. Octafish Jan 2015 #4

Operation Merlin was a successful Clinton era op. We gave fake plans to Iran, msanthrope Jan 2015 #6

Of course not. Octafish Jan 2015 #8

Tell us why you think President Clinton should go to jail for Operation Merlin. nt msanthrope Jan 2015 #16

But that's not what I wrote, is it? Octafish Jan 2015 #34

You said "his former bosses." nt msanthrope Jan 2015 #58

Who's the boss of the Secret Government, msanthrope? Octafish Jan 2015 #60

was it really a 'success'? bigtree Jan 2015 #11

Boom! Owned AND served! No one will ever know whether KingCharlemagne Jan 2015 #12

Does Iran have nukes? Then it was a success. Were there other fuckups? msanthrope Jan 2015 #15

it has always been questionable whether Iran had a nuke program to begin with bigtree Jan 2015 #20

And? Still doesn't make Operation Merlin illegal. Further, Risen did not msanthrope Jan 2015 #23

Risen was protecting his sources, as any good reporter will do, have done bigtree Jan 2015 #24

So who was Sterling protecting, as msanthrope points out? randome Jan 2015 #28

Sterling was protecting himself. bigtree Jan 2015 #33

You are suggesting Risen let an innocent man be convicted. There is no msanthrope Jan 2015 #32

there's nothing to guarantee Risen testifying Sterling wasn't the source would have exonerated him bigtree Jan 2015 #35

How is it a strawman? The allegation was that Sterling leaked to Risen. Sterling denied it. randome Jan 2015 #44

tha answer is that the defense felt they could not compel that answer from Risen bigtree Jan 2015 #49

So Sterling wanted to go to jail because he didn't want to inconvenience Risen? randome Jan 2015 #51

of course, I didn't say anything of the kind bigtree Jan 2015 #57

Successful? Likely not. Luminous Animal Jan 2015 #26

"That may be what happened with Merlin." msanthrope Jan 2015 #37

It's not whistleblowing when you leak to the press a perfectly legal CIA msanthrope Jan 2015 #5

the 'leak' likely came from Congress first bigtree Jan 2015 #9

Sometimes lawsuits arise from being 'malcontent'. randome Jan 2015 #10

his initial report was to Senate investigators and it's questionable whether the 'leak' was from him bigtree Jan 2015 #13

If it had....why didn't Sterling call Risen to the stand to confirm that Sterling msanthrope Jan 2015 #14

such nonsense bigtree Jan 2015 #17

Wrong....Risen refused to reveal his source to the prosecution. Had the defense msanthrope Jan 2015 #21

that's nonsense. bigtree Jan 2015 #25

No...it's legal fact. The reason Risen wasn't called to the stand, although Sterling could have msanthrope Jan 2015 #30

funny that conclusion wasn't ANY part of the prosecution case bigtree Jan 2015 #36

You really think the jury was so dim-witted they didn't notice the utter msanthrope Jan 2015 #39

we're done, msanthrope bigtree Jan 2015 #43

I'm encouraging posters to read the actual case documents, like msanthrope Jan 2015 #45

Risen wouldn't testify. He's been all over the news with that riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #18

Risen wouldn't testify for the prosecution. He'd have been immediately jailed at the trial msanthrope Jan 2015 #22

I'll let Common Dreams answer for me riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #27

right, good link bigtree Jan 2015 #29

Yes...it's been the law of the land for 40 years now. You don't have a right to avoid msanthrope Jan 2015 #40

Oh bullshit. Sterling blowing the whistle on ridiculous botched CIA ops riderinthestorm Jan 2015 #54

So when Sterling revealed Human Asset #1 to sell his book..... msanthrope Jan 2015 #56

Indefatigable apologist for the administration. nt elias49 Jan 2015 #31

hoping that if enough garbage is thrown in the air, readers will turn away from the stink bigtree Jan 2015 #38

Yes...it must be disinformation if someone not only disagrees with you, they msanthrope Jan 2015 #42

strange to present yourself as an authority on Sterling's defense, while working to discredit him bigtree Jan 2015 #47

Thank you...what was posted completely supports my point. The defense could have msanthrope Jan 2015 #48

Risen stated in pre-trial, unequivocally, that he would NOT reveal his sources bigtree Jan 2015 #52

He still could have been called by defense, and had he refused on the stand, at trial, msanthrope Jan 2015 #53

there would still be a question of what the reporter was withholding bigtree Jan 2015 #59

Hey.....that "question" translates into "reasonable doubt." msanthrope Jan 2015 #62

so 'damning' that the government pleaded with the judge to bar Risen's testimony bigtree Jan 2015 #64

They wanted to bar the transcript, because Risen could be called. I would expect no less from any msanthrope Jan 2015 #65

that book you say 'Sterling' wrote, was trying to sell? bigtree Jan 2015 #61

Ha!!! No....the book he was negotiations with. CIA wouldn't clear it. nt msanthrope Jan 2015 #63

I have nothing to apologize for. This has been the law for 40 years...you msanthrope Jan 2015 #41

You need to read for understanding elias49 Jan 2015 #50

Your old "Julian Assange" thread? The one that got hidden? msanthrope Jan 2015 #55

I thought we were signers of the Nuclear Nonproliferation pact. JEB Jan 2015 #7

This was exactly what we demanded Cheney and Libby's head for Recursion Jan 2015 #19

I love the post hoc defense of Judith Miller presented in this thread. nt msanthrope Jan 2015 #46