CLOUDS OVER U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

Three recent events have brought embarrassment and discredit to the
U.S. Attorney's Office in Tampa.

A judge found one prosecutor guilty of violating The Florida Bar's
rules of professional conduct for deliberately misleading a court by
allowing a witness to testify under an alias.

Similarly, a panel of judges from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in
Atlanta said sanctions are justified against another prosecutor whose
conduct before a grand jury the panel found ``condemnable.''

And most significantly, the federal prosecutor's office found itself
defending the indefensible when a state trooper testified that he and
others have routinely lied to state judges about traffic stops in drug
cases with the full knowledge and cooperation of the FBI. The
prosecutor's office took the position that tainted affidavits are not
enough to warrant dismissal of a case, that such ``mistakes'' do not
outweigh the fact that defendants broke the law.

We can understand the frustration of the police officers, FBI agents
and lawyers who deal with crime on a daily basis. Theirs is a
dangerous and difficult profession. But not much separates the good
guys from the bad when they take it upon themselves to flout the rules
and stomp on the rights of defendants.

Karen Cox, a star prosecutor for the Hillsborough State Attorney's
Office before moving to the federal system, allowed a witness in an
Internet pornography case to testify under a false name. The defendant
in the case may well have been guilty, but he was effectively denied
his right to confront the witness when she took the stand under false
pretenses.

When Judge Steven Merryday learned about the misrepresentation, he was
so outraged by this blatant abuse of the process that he threw out the
charges. Cox didn't set out to lie or mislead the court. She set out
to win, and in doing so, she put her career in jeopardy.

Winning apparently was also at the heart of prosecutor Michael
Rubenstein's control of the grand jury that indicted a St. Petersburg
company and its executives in 1996. The company and two executives
were convicted of selling millions of dollars of fetid imported shrimp.

But the 11th Circuit accuses Rubenstein of lying to the grand jury and
trying to rush its deliberations in order to rubber-stamp the case.
It's rare for a court to chastise a prosecutor by name, not to mention
suggesting sanctions.

It strikes us as odd, however, that the court would find his actions
so egregious and still affirm the conviction he achieved. There are
those who would argue that the judges did a disservice to Rubenstein
by smearing his name and yet taking no punitive action.

The most troubling event, however, is the office's justification for
lying to state court judges in sworn affidavits: The defendants
obviously broke the law.

Again, while law enforcement received a blistering tongue-lashing
from Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Jenkins, federal charges were allowed
to remain against the defendants.

``This case has nothing to do with pretext,'' Jenkins wrote. ``It has
everything to do with candor. To conceal the true facts surrounding an
arrest in an affidavit submitted to a judicial officer is
reprehensible.''

New U.S. Attorney Donna Bucella would do her office and this district
a service by declaring she will not file charges based on tainted
police affidavits. The practice is wrong and should not be tolerated.

The federal system is already set up to favor the government.
Defendants, for example, don't know who the witnesses against them
will be until trial.

Prosecutors do not need to circumvent the rules.