#1
Posted: 5/24/06 at 11:37pm
Video at the link. Snippet:
CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC ANCHOR: Rove's attorneys are waiting for a decision from Fitzgerald on whether Rove will be charged or cleared.
So the question now is, what's the procedure for deciding if a crime has been committed? Hardball correspondent David Shuster has been talking with former federal prosecutors who were once in a similar position and he has this report.
DAVID SHUSTER, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT. (voiceover): It was exactly four weeks ago today when Presidential advisor Karl Rove testified for the fifth time in the CIA leak investigation. 28 days later, the man known as Bush's brain still has not been cleared. Rove's lawyers say they've heard nothing from prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald and believe Rove remains under investigation for testimony related to a conversation with Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper about CIA operative Valerie Wilson.
Fitzgerald's office refuses to comment. But former federal prosecutors describe the following procedure when considering an indictment: First, a prosecution team would review the evidence. Then, they would examine case law on the relevant criminal statutes. And finally, the prosecutors would decide whether a reasonable jury would convict at trial.
If prosecutors believe they would win a conviction, then they would prepare to seek a grand jury indictment.
One former federal prosecutor says the timing now for Rove is not in his favor.
DAVID SCHERTLER, former federal prosecutor: "If Patrick Fitzgerald had in fact reached a decision not to indict, he would have announced that and he would have told Karl Rove and his attorneys. The fact that he hasn't announced it makes you believe that he might be headed towards an indictment and might be tightening up all the loose ends at this point in anticipation of presenting the indictment."
Prosecutors say silence in CIA leak case may signal Rove indictment coming
CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC ANCHOR: Rove's attorneys are waiting for a decision from Fitzgerald on whether Rove will be charged or cleared.
So the question now is, what's the procedure for deciding if a crime has been committed? Hardball correspondent David Shuster has been talking with former federal prosecutors who were once in a similar position and he has this report.
DAVID SHUSTER, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT. (voiceover): It was exactly four weeks ago today when Presidential advisor Karl Rove testified for the fifth time in the CIA leak investigation. 28 days later, the man known as Bush's brain still has not been cleared. Rove's lawyers say they've heard nothing from prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald and believe Rove remains under investigation for testimony related to a conversation with Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper about CIA operative Valerie Wilson.
Fitzgerald's office refuses to comment. But former federal prosecutors describe the following procedure when considering an indictment: First, a prosecution team would review the evidence. Then, they would examine case law on the relevant criminal statutes. And finally, the prosecutors would decide whether a reasonable jury would convict at trial.
If prosecutors believe they would win a conviction, then they would prepare to seek a grand jury indictment.
One former federal prosecutor says the timing now for Rove is not in his favor.
DAVID SCHERTLER, former federal prosecutor: "If Patrick Fitzgerald had in fact reached a decision not to indict, he would have announced that and he would have told Karl Rove and his attorneys. The fact that he hasn't announced it makes you believe that he might be headed towards an indictment and might be tightening up all the loose ends at this point in anticipation of presenting the indictment."
Prosecutors say silence in CIA leak case may signal Rove indictment coming
