Prosecutor's Disappointment: Where Did It Come From?

After a federal jury handed lead prosecutor, assistant US attorney Ken Taylor, a rejection of his allegations against Bill Nighbert, Ernie Fletcher's former Transportation Secretary, Taylor commented to the press that he was "disappointed".  This comment raises a few questions. Out of what was Taylor's disappointment born and should Taylor's decisions in this "political prosecution" themselves be subject to a close examination now that ordinary citizens have rejected his call for conviction?

Nighbert's lawyer, Howard Mann, says that the prosecution's case was full of holes, particularly the testimony of their main witness, James Rumage, upon whom Ken Taylor built this costly prosecution.  But Taylor chose to push ahead anyway, dragging Nighbert through the gauntlet of negative press where so many reputations have been destroyed by a thousand cuts.

Should Taylor's political affiliations raise any concerns?  Taylor attended Fancy Farm in 2005, the year of the governor's tribulations.  Though he was the chief elections fraud prosecutor in the Eastern District of Kentucky, he was observed to be keeping company with the very democrats who were trying to bring down the Fletcher administration.

It should be remembered that democrat Greg Stumbo, a candidate for governor himself earlier that year, had targeted Governor Fletcher primarily focusing on people in Nighbert's transportation cabinet.  The phrase "The damage is in the indictment" has become known as "The Stumbo Way."

In 2008 Taylor began the prosecution of former Transportation Secretary Nighbert primarily on the now discredited testimony of James Rummage.  Isn't it fair to ask, "Was there an element of partisanship in his decision"? 

Taylor took an oath as an assistant United States Attorney.  Yet to date there has been no indictment of Stumbo despite the very disturbing allegation that Greg Stumbo attempted to thwart a federal criminal investigation into former Democratic Lieutenant Governor Steve Henry.  "Stumbo and his cronies" were directly accused of pressuring a Kentucky blogger to "destroy evidence" and "shred documents".  And if memory serves correctly, more than one person has at least raised the specter that Greg Stumbo was implicated in significant wrongdoing, while in office, without any word of an indictment by Taylor. 

In the past Stumbo has been accused of ignoring a woman's claims that her civil rights were violated by a county prosecutor for purely political reasons, and some even recall a former Stumbo assistant bringing allegations of drug trafficking to Taylor's attention which might have implicated Stumbo himself, without an indictment.

Was Taylor hanging with the democrats hoping for an appointment to become the US Attorney under a democratic administration?  Was his weak prosecution of Nighbert done with proper motives?  Was his reliance upon Rummage any different than the reliance he might have placed upon others who complained about alleged criminal conduct by democratic officials, but whom Taylor might have ignored?

And while prosecutors deserve the same benefit of the doubt given to their accused, when political prosecutions are rejected by ordinary citizens serving as impartial jurors, the motives of the government prosecutors themselves require close scrutiny. 

As in the recent case involving the now infamous prosecutor Mike Nifong and the Duke LaCrosse players, history teaches us that unless and until the public is satisfied that the tremendous power possessed the government is managed with fairness to all, an uneasy feeling will continue to grow in this nation until it reaches critical mass, resulting in civil unrest.

The mainstream media has the resources to fully explore these things.  Will they?

Just asking.

Comments

[Bonnie Hoepker Alford]

As long as the Demoncrats are in control there will be no fairness in goverment. I have never seen such a bunch of double standard spend hogs. Anything a Republican allegedly does is plastered all over the liberal media. It shows in both the printed and the televised format. However; let a democrat do something ie: I did not have sex with that woman. And it is overlooked, forgiven and forgotten. Some of my relatives have told me with my passion for the constitution and the feelings I have about our rights being stripped from us, I should consider politics. No way I have too many skeletons in my closet and wish not to have my family drug through the wringer. Marcus, I admire you for publishing things I don't see anywhere else. It is refreshing to see the truth for a CHANGE.

[Dead Sadie]

Excellent. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? In answer to your final question..NO.