A few weeks ago I made a Freedom of Information Act request to the Department of Justice seeking a copy of the government's immunity agreement with Ed Peters. DOJ refused my request. Here is a copy of DOJ's refusal letter. According to the DOJ, I am not entitled to the information because Peters did not consent and there was no showing that the public disclosure outweighs Peters' privacy interests. My request letter to the DOJ did not identify a public interest for the disclosure. My limited research on the topic, however, suggests that this is not the type of private information that the privacy act was designed to protect. In addition, it's my understanding that the government should produce the information with the private information redacted. The suggestion that the public in not interested in the Peters immunity deal is a joke. I suspect that the DOJ does not want to produce the agreement because it is embarrassed that DOJ granted Peters immunity. My informal reading of public opinion both in and outside the bar is that Peters should have been prosecuted.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Hide and Seek on Immunity Deal
The soap opera surrounding the ridiculous immunity deal given to the corrupt former DA from Mississippi, Ed "Pied Piper" Peters took a more interesting turn yesterday.
The Mississippi Litigation Review run by Philip Thomas wrote and posted the following:
A joke it is!
As we said in an earlier post, U.S. Attorney Jim Greenlee made a monstrous, Mississippi mistake. Greenlee, the same sloppy prosecutor who recently dropped the ball 27 times in a highly-publicized criminal case, is an agent of the Rove Republican Racket and gave Peters a free ride: 100-percent immunity in a judicial bribery scandal and partial reimbursement of $1 million in proceeds from the same bribe.
Now Greenlee and his staff are hiding their tracks. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder should force the DOJ to release the documents related to this half-baked deal. Read more about the Pied Piper Peters here.