Independent Counsel, E. Norman Veasey, urges the public and lawmakers to read very carefully the report released by his office. In short, the report does precisely what the Tuesday News Journal editorial correctly notes:
[T]his is a legal document. Justice Veasey and his staff worked as special deputy attorneys general. As the report forthrightly states, the investigators had to deal with what they could prove. They were bound by what the laws actually state and were confined by formalities such as statutes of limitations.
The report tells citizens: Suspicion and speculation are not evidence.
In the long run, that will be the report’s strength. … This is not a witch hunt. It is a meticulously assembled report that gives Delawareans a good look at how and where the state’s campaign finance laws work and do not work.
Some critics of the report have argued, in effect, that it fails to hold “accountable” (i.e. to prosecute) people, including public officials, whose behavior the report itself condemns. But, as the editorial properly notes, we are special deputy attorneys general and are bound by what the evidence shows, what the laws provide, and statutes of limitations. Further, in the words of the editorial, the report was “meticulously assembled” to give “Delawareans a good look at how and where the state’s campaign finance laws work and do not work.”
As public prosecutors we are bound not only by the law and the need to prove every element of every crime beyond a reasonable doubt, but also we are Delaware lawyers, ethically bound by the Supreme Court’s Rules of Professional Conduct. Rule 3.8 “Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor” states that “[t]he prosecutor in a criminal case shall … refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause.” The report clearly demonstrates that criminal charges some critics would have us make are not supported by evidence sufficient to prosecute. Thus, to bring such a charge would be professional misconduct, subject to possible disbarment.
Some politicians seem to have wanted an irresponsible “witch hunt,” which the editorial clearly states this investigation is not and should not be. The failure of some elected officials or donors to follow the law carefully does not mean they should be indicted when there is no credible evidence of all the elements of a crime that we could bring to a judge and jury in a court of law and prove beyond a reasonable doubt, and at a considerable expense of taxpayer money.
The report details this exhaustive investigation, why this is so and precisely why it took over two years (see page 9). The report also provides the net out-of-pocket cost to the state, after crediting the recoveries obtained by Independent Counsel and the extent of the pro bono services provided by the Weil Gotshal firm (see page 27).
Again, the public and politicians are respectfully urged to read and understand the clear language of the entire report. We have very responsible Representatives and Senators who want to do the right thing and consider ways to reform the weaknesses in our campaign finance and public integrity laws. An informed public as well as an informed General Assembly are keys to that goal. Moreover, given the publicity attendant to the charges and civil settlements, the investigation, and the report, it may be less problematic to prove intent with respect to any future violations.
The entire text of the report and this news release are available for public inspection on the homepage of the Delaware Department of Justice website at www.attorneygeneral.delaware.gov. Hard copies may also be obtained by emailing Jason Miller (Jason.miller@delaware.gov), Public Information Officer at the Delaware Department of Justice.
# # #