Denogean: Gonzales push for execution troublesome
by Anne T. Denogean on Jul. 03, 2007, under Local, Nation/World
Former U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton of Arizona, testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, March 6, 2007, at a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing.
There was a story out of Washington last week that got little attention as the media rightly focused on the immigration reform bill and embarrassingly obsessed over Paris Hilton’s release from jail.
It shed light on the firing of Paul Charlton from his position as U.S. attorney for Arizona. But, more important, it also suggested that U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales – chief law enforcement officer of the land – is overzealous, and possibly cavalier, in his pursuit of the death penalty.
Charlton testified Wednesday before a Senate subcommittee reviewing the use of the federal death penalty.
In the still-pending case against Jose Rios Rico, whom Charlton described as a methamphetamine dealer charged with killing his drug supplier, Gonzales ordered Charlton to seek the death penalty over Charlton’s repeated objections.
The case relies on the testimony of witnesses who have pleaded guilty to other charges and agreed to testify against Rios Rico, Charlton said. There is no forensic evidence directly linking the defendant to the victim’s death. There is no gun, no ballistics and no victim’s DNA on the defendant.
“In fact,” he testified. “There is no body.”
Informants told the government the victim is buried in a landfill in Mobile. The Department of Justice refused Charlton’s request to cover the $500,000 to $1 million cost of exhumation. Charlton said it was wrong for the government to seek the death penalty if it wouldn’t pay to obtain evidence that could strengthen or weaken its case.
Based on the lack of forensic evidence, Charlton didn’t want to seek the death penalty. Even a slight risk of executing the wrong man is “too high.”
“If a government seeks to take another person’s life, it should do so only on the best of evidence,” he said.
He submitted a detailed memo and had the prosecutors assigned to the case argue against seeking death in front of the Department of Justice’s Death Penalty Committee.
Under former Attorney General John Ashcroft, when the committee disagreed with Charlton, he was given a chance to provide more input before a final decision.
Not this time. Instead, he received a letter from Gonzales “authorizing” him to seek the death penalty.
Charlton spoke with various people in the AG’s office to have the decision reconsidered. Eventually, he received a call from Mike Elston, chief of staff for Deputy AG Paul McNulty.
Charlton testified that Elston said McNulty had spent significant time on the issue with the AG, “perhaps as much as five to 10 minutes,” and the AG’s mind was unchanged.
Charlton’s request to speak personally with Gonzales was denied.
The Washington Post article on Charlton’s testimony – relegated to Page A7 – also reported on an e-mail sent from Gonzales’ then-chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson, to Elston about the episode:
“In the ‘you won’t believe this category,’ Paul Charlton would like a few minutes of the AG’s time.”
Charlton said in a phone interview Friday that the e-mail represented the failure of the process, “that in an issue as important as whether or not to take another person’s life, my request to the AG would be treated that way.”
Aside from the Post, NPR covered the testimony. None of the bigwigs of network or cable news or any of the major talk radio personalities has called Charlton to follow up on his eyebrow-raising account of how justice is administered in the U.S.
Charlton, appointed in 2001 by President Bush, was one of nine federal prosecutors asked to resign last year. He was willing to go quietly until his DOJ bosses suggested he and the others were fired for poor performance.
Since then, it has come out that policy disputes, such as the one over the death penalty, and the Bush administration’s desire to replace the fired prosecutors with loyal Bushies were the more likely motivations.
After being fired, Charlton joined the Phoenix law firm of Gallagher & Kennedy. He focuses on corporate compliance law and is developing an Indian law practice.
But he said he’s dismayed at how politics touched the DOJ, where he worked for more than 16 years.
“One of the terrific aspects of being a prosecutor, one of the things that makes it a noble profession is that your single goal should be to do the right thing (without) any consideration for someone’s political loyalty and agenda . . . .
“What happened as the result of the resignations is that now when federal prosecutors make charges against political figures, especially those in an opposing party, the claims of unfair prosecution or lack of integrity are gaining traction. That’s a great personal disappointment to me because I loved the Department of Justice.”
The State Bar of Arizona honored Charlton on Friday with the Michael C. Cudahy Criminal Justice Award, recognizing his prosecutorial work as representing the public’s interest with integrity, fairness, brilliance and professionalism.
Somehow, I don’t think such words will be used to describe Gonzales when he leaves his post.
Anne T. Denogean can be reached at 573-4582 and adenogean@tucsoncitizen.com. Address letters to P.O. Box 26767, Tucson, AZ 85726-6767. Her column runs Tuesdays and Fridays.
Anne’s blog: news, analysis, updates
