MORTARDUDE
03-29-2004, 01:44 AM
http://www.whistleblowers.org/
LEADING DOJ ANTI-TERRORISM PROSECUTOR SUES ASHCROFT OVER CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS
DOJ Illegally Leaks Name of Confidential Informant
Washington, D.C. February 17, 2004. A fourteen year- veteran Assistant United States Attorney, who obtained guilty verdicts in the first terrorism case to be tried before a jury after the 9/11 attacks, has filed a First Amendment and Privacy Act suit against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). According to the suit, the DOJ violated AUSA Richard Convertino?s constitutional rights when it retaliated againt Convertino after he ?blew the whistle? to a U.S. Senator on DOJ malfeaseanse and incompetence in the ?war on terrorism.?
According to the suit: ?Since in or about 2002, and continuing until present, Plaintiff [AUSA Convertino] and co-counsel have been vocal and consistent with supervisors and officials within the Defendant DOJ about the lack of support and cooperation, lack of effective assistance, lack of resources and intra-departmental infighting that plagued and hindered the terrorism investigation and prosecution of United States v. Koubriti and other terrorism cases. These concerns directly related to the ability of the United States to effectively utilize the criminal justice system as a component in the ?war on terrorism.??
The complaint alleges ?gross mismanagment? within the Terrorism and Violent Crimes Section of the DOJ that ?negatively impact(ed) the ability of the United States to obtain convictions in a major terrorist? trial and accused DOJ-Washington, D.C. of illegally leaking the name of a well-placed confidential informant {?CI?).
The suit also accuses high level officials within the DOJ of criminally ?leaking? false and derrogatory information about AUSA Convertino. In one of the illegal discosures, DOJ provided a media source with the name of a highly confidential ?CI?. This informant worked undercover and was providing information regarding terrorist related activities. After DOJ illegally released his name, the CI went into hiding and then was forced to leave the United States.
?Leaking the name of a highly confidential CI was both immoral and illegal. DOJ?s leaks against Mr. Convertino are among the most egregious violations of the Privacy Act ever recorded in the United States. The officials who leaked or authorized the leak, no matter how high up in the DOJ, must be held accountable for their misconduct,? said Stephen M. Kohn, an attorney for Mr. Convertino. ?Ashcroft Justice Department officials are engaging in constitutional vandalism - they have wreaked havoc on the First Amendment, and simply do not care about the health and safety of CI?s in the war on terror. DOJ?s leak seriously undermined the ability of the United States to obtain ?human assets? that have been deeded essential by the Attorney General in protecting American citizens from the terrible impact of another terrorist attack on American soil,? Kohn added.
The case was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and was assigned to Judge Royce C. Lamberth. A copy of the complaint may be obtained from the U.S. District Court computerized docketing system. The case number is 1:04CV00236.
LEADING DOJ ANTI-TERRORISM PROSECUTOR SUES ASHCROFT OVER CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS
DOJ Illegally Leaks Name of Confidential Informant
Washington, D.C. February 17, 2004. A fourteen year- veteran Assistant United States Attorney, who obtained guilty verdicts in the first terrorism case to be tried before a jury after the 9/11 attacks, has filed a First Amendment and Privacy Act suit against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). According to the suit, the DOJ violated AUSA Richard Convertino?s constitutional rights when it retaliated againt Convertino after he ?blew the whistle? to a U.S. Senator on DOJ malfeaseanse and incompetence in the ?war on terrorism.?
According to the suit: ?Since in or about 2002, and continuing until present, Plaintiff [AUSA Convertino] and co-counsel have been vocal and consistent with supervisors and officials within the Defendant DOJ about the lack of support and cooperation, lack of effective assistance, lack of resources and intra-departmental infighting that plagued and hindered the terrorism investigation and prosecution of United States v. Koubriti and other terrorism cases. These concerns directly related to the ability of the United States to effectively utilize the criminal justice system as a component in the ?war on terrorism.??
The complaint alleges ?gross mismanagment? within the Terrorism and Violent Crimes Section of the DOJ that ?negatively impact(ed) the ability of the United States to obtain convictions in a major terrorist? trial and accused DOJ-Washington, D.C. of illegally leaking the name of a well-placed confidential informant {?CI?).
The suit also accuses high level officials within the DOJ of criminally ?leaking? false and derrogatory information about AUSA Convertino. In one of the illegal discosures, DOJ provided a media source with the name of a highly confidential ?CI?. This informant worked undercover and was providing information regarding terrorist related activities. After DOJ illegally released his name, the CI went into hiding and then was forced to leave the United States.
?Leaking the name of a highly confidential CI was both immoral and illegal. DOJ?s leaks against Mr. Convertino are among the most egregious violations of the Privacy Act ever recorded in the United States. The officials who leaked or authorized the leak, no matter how high up in the DOJ, must be held accountable for their misconduct,? said Stephen M. Kohn, an attorney for Mr. Convertino. ?Ashcroft Justice Department officials are engaging in constitutional vandalism - they have wreaked havoc on the First Amendment, and simply do not care about the health and safety of CI?s in the war on terror. DOJ?s leak seriously undermined the ability of the United States to obtain ?human assets? that have been deeded essential by the Attorney General in protecting American citizens from the terrible impact of another terrorist attack on American soil,? Kohn added.
The case was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and was assigned to Judge Royce C. Lamberth. A copy of the complaint may be obtained from the U.S. District Court computerized docketing system. The case number is 1:04CV00236.