The notion that in this age, it is sufficient to prosecute people based on an agent’s self-serving notes (302’s) sometimes written a considerable time after interviews, is ridiculous. We have read that 302’s forming the basis of some of Mueller’s investigations were changed by supervisors and the originals lost; we know that in the Libby case one agent present at his interview conceded at trial that the 302 of her co-agent (retired just as trial began) was inconsistent with her recollections, Videos of interviews are easy to do. They are used by police forces throughout the country and, to the best of my knowledge by Western law enforcement agencies outside the U.S. The attorney general should issue a directive scrapping further use of this 302 gambit. How would you like to face a grand jury with only your word versus the written account of the FBI agent who handled the interview? I wouldn’t. I’d never agree to an interview that was not videographed or transcribed by a stenographer.
Clarice makes some very reasonable-sounding suggestions about cleaning up the corruption in the FBI and DOJ here.
No comments:
Post a Comment