Since its inception in 1870, the U.S. Department of Justice has had among its chief duties "to seek just punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior" and "to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans."
Within that context, it is very difficult to accept the Justice Department's Dec. 3 decision not to investigate modern America's highest-profile case of prosecutorial misconduct, also known as former Durham district attorney Mike Nifong's handling of the lacrosse case.
The justification for such an inquiry was undeniable: As Jim Cooney, the leader of Reade Seligmann's defense team, explained in an October 2007 letter, federal intervention is warranted because "the District Attorney is the chief law enforcement officer for Durham County [and it is] plain that [he will] not investigate himself." Furthermore, Cooney noted, "There was little that the Attorney General of North Carolina could do, since his jurisdiction is extremely limited and since he has no power to convene an investigative grand jury under North Carolina law."
And yet 11 months after the Seligmanns first asked investigators from the United States Attorney for New Jersey's office to look into official misconduct in Durham (Cooney noted that the Seligmanns contacted the New Jersey office because it appeared that the United States Attorney for the Middle District of North Carolina "could have a conflict in conducting an investigation into law enforcement authorities... with whom she is required to work and conduct investigations on a regular basis"), that inquiry has been shut down for what are plainly political concerns.
As Cooney took pains to point out, Assistant United States attorneys from New Jersey met with Reade Seligmann and his father "beginning in January and for several weeks and months thereafter" to collect "motions, transcripts and other pleadings that were part of the public record" from the family.
In fact, it wasn't until those assistant U.S. attorneys traveled to North Carolina for a September 2007 meeting with representatives from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of North Carolina and members of the N.C. attorney general's staff that the roadblocks began materializing.
First, the New Jersey investigators were informed upon their arrival in Raleigh that they had been "denied permission to even meet with the representatives of the Attorney General of North Carolina"-which was the primary reason for their long-scheduled visit in the first place.
Three months later, that process of official withdrawal has culminated in Acting U.S. Deputy Attorney General Craig Morford's Dec. 3 letter explaining that the feds believe North Carolina should have sole responsibility for "protecting the integrity of its judicial proceedings, holding Mr. Nifong accountable for his actions as an officer of its courts and vindicating the principles of justice under state law."
As Cooper has made abundantly clear, that decision effectively means that there will be no investigation at all. In particular, a statement released by his office noted that "it would be difficult to conduct additional investigation into this matter without federal participation" since state authorities cannot compel witnesses to testify or punish them for lying. And following the disintegration of Durham's Whichard committee-the body that was formed to study city police in the aftermath of last spring's woefully distorted Baker-Chalmers report-it's hard to imagine any other viable options.
That's why this sudden refusal to investigate Nifong's all-but-unprecedented violation of citizens' rights is so unusual-especially for the same agency that is widely known for bringing down former speaker of the House Jim Black, former secretary of agriculture Meg Scott Phipps and several state legislators convicted of official corruption.
As Cooney noted, the DOJ has a "significant and recent history of state and federal authorities joining together to investigate allegations of official corruption in North Carolina," and it does not lack justification for its involvement: Indeed, Congress has made it a crime for government officials to act "under color of state law with the intent [to deprive] United States citizens of their liberty."
Rather, what the agency lacks is the political backbone to do the kind of work that once made it a hero of the civil rights movement or the scourge of organized crime. Between officials' sham rationale-indeed, the Justice Department's position that "this matter involves the conduct of a state prosecutor applying state law in a state criminal trial... [and so] the State of North Carolina has the primary interests in this matter" is positively untenable when you realize that Attorney General Roy Cooper has personally requested federal intervention-and their behind-closed-doors political maneuverings, this decision will forever remain among the most shameful chapters of the DOJ's history.
Indeed, as Cooney made clear to The News & Observer, the feds are "not saying there aren't any crimes." They're simply saying that no official has the courage to investigate them.
Kristin Butler is a Trinity senior. This her final column of the semester.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.