Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
)
)
)
)
) Civil Action No.:______________
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
This Court has jurisdiction over this action under both 5 U.S.C.
552(a)(4)(B) and 28 U.S.C. 1331. Venue is proper in the district under 5 U.S.C.
552(a)(4)(B).
2.
Alabama.
3.
The DOJ, and the OPR within it, fall within the meaning of agency
widely held as one of the most controversial cases brought by the Department of
Justice in recent history.
7.
lost reelection in 2002, partly due to press reports based on information leaked
from a grand jury investigation of Mr. Siegelman. 1
Although Siegelman officially lost re-election in 2002, evidence indicates he may have won the most votes. On
election night, Siegelman was declared the winner by the Associated Press and gave an acceptance speech. By the
next morning, a different result was announced. All of the deciding votes for Siegelmans opponent were counted in
Baldwin County, where an after-hours retabulation was conducted after Democratic Party poll watchers had gone
home for the evening. The Republican Attorney General, who had initiated the criminal investigation against Mr.
Siegelman, certified the retabulation of 6,000 votes from this precinct after rejecting calls for a supervised recount.
An independent Auburn University statistical analysis of the election results concluded that the Baldwin County
returns were almost certainly tampered with.
8.
On May 27, 2004, nearly two years after the initial leaks from the
grand jury, Mr. Siegelman was indicted in the Northern District of Alabama.
Judge U.W. Clemon dismissed part of that indictment with prejudice, after finding
that the government was unable to make a prima facie showing that would allow
their claim to be presented to a jury. The remaining charges were dismissed by the
government.
9.
criminal case over which I presided in my entire judicial career [of nearly 30
years].
10.
the 2006 Alabama gubernatorial race, federal prosecutors in the Middle District of
Alabama brought a new indictment against Mr. Siegelman. At that time, the
United States Attorney for the Middle District of Alabama was married to a key
campaign consultant for Mr. Siegelmans opponent.
11.
The Middle District U.S. Attorney had claimed she would recuse
herself from the prosecution after an attorney for Mr. Siegelman uncovered and
complained of her conflict, but evidence shows that the U.S. Attorney remained
involved in the case.
12.
II.
13.
Post-Conviction Fact-Finding
organizations, including 60 Minutes, TIME Magazine, The New York Times, The
Washington Post, Harpers Magazine and others, reported on the Siegelman case
and have questioned the veracity of the conviction and the propriety of the
governments conduct in obtaining it.
14.
During the same time period as many of these reports, the Honorable
An official in the appellate division of the DOJ reported this improper ex parte communication years later in a
letter to Siegelmans attorney on the eve of a filing deadline. This particular misconduct was not independently
uncovered by the press.
urge you to ensure that the OPR investigation into this matter is done in a
thorough, comprehensive, and professional manner, and that it be conducted with
sufficient transparency, expedition, and impartiality to be seen as credible by the
many outside observers who have so closely followed this case.
16.
Sometime thereafter, the OPR concluded its inquiry into the matter.
17.
As of the date of the filing of this action, the OPR has not released its
In that letter, the DOJ admits that several of its officials involved in
the AUSA and a small group of like-minded conservative prosecutors within the
U.S. Attorneys office were pursuing Siegelman.
21.
Siegelman prosecution concealed her husbands connections to, and activities for,
Republican politicians.
22.
case, including but not limited to the fact that the DOJ knew that their key witness,
whose assertions founded their case, lacked credibility, and further, that
prosecutors pursued Mr. Siegelman in lieu of investigating allegations of
misconduct by prominent Republicans.
23.
attorneys.
IV.
24.
request to the OPR seeking a copy of the full report of its findings from its
investigation that revealed the prosecutorial misconduct referenced in the June 3,
2010 letter and POGO article.
25.
26.
In a letter dated June 18, 2015, OPR denied Plaintiffs request, citing
On September 28, 2015, OPR denied the appeal, citing the same
sought by Plaintiff.
31.
requested by Plaintiff.
32.
request.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court (1)
issue an injunction ordering Defendant to disclose the requested documents, (2)
provide for the expeditious processing of this action, (3) award Plaintiff reasonable
attorney fees and other litigation costs incurred by Plaintiff in this action, exclusive
7