When the ones trusted to follow the law, forget the rules. The US DOJ and Michael Flynn

I have been a peace officer way more than half my life, and I have always strived to do what was right and just. I have seen my fellow officers do the same, day in and day out.

I have seen literally hundreds of cases that didn’t go anywhere because, even though you are sure somebody was guilty, there wasn’t enough to go forward, or there was evidence that brought doubt into a case.

The foundation of law enforcement is built on facts, and you have to follow the facts, or you are no better that who you are trying to arrest, or investigate.

Politics and personal feelings should be left at the door.

Having said all that, consider this:

General Michael Flynn held the position of National Security Advisor to newly elected President, Donald Trump, but after less than a month in that position, he would leave, and later plead guilty to lying to FBI agents.

Flynn admitted that he made false statements to the FBI about the nature of his communications with the Russian Ambassador to the United States before the election.

Some believed the entire case against him was only pursued to get to his former boss, President Trump, some believed it was a legitimate charge. Keeping political views out of it, he said he did it, and we move on, right? Not in Washington.

Regardless of your feelings on the matter, now we find out that the US Department of Justice held back exculpatory evidence in the Flynn case. Something that you cannot do; the government has to disclose evidence materially favorable to the accused. In 1963, the US Supreme Court put out a decision in the Brady v. Maryland that under the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments, a prosecutor has a duty to disclose favorable evidence to defendants upon request, if the evidence is “material” to either guilt, or punishment.

Newly unsealed evidence shows top FBI officials, in the form of a handwritten memo, pondered whether their “goal” was “to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired” – but the prosecution didn’t disclose that tidbit. Also found in the unsealed information, was a “Closing Communication” from the FBI Washington Field Office, that recommended the FBI close its investigation of Flynn prior to the charge being put forth against him. That communication stated that their search for relevant documents supporting a criminal charge “ did not yield any information on which to predicate further investigative efforts.”

You don’t always win in law enforcement, but one thing you have to do, is play by the rules. You put all the cards in the table, and a jury decides, pure and simple.

All they had to do was follow the rules, why is that so hard?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s