COURT RULES OUT PROMISES OF LENIENCY

Law enforcement: The appellate judges say prosecutor's offers of reduced
sentences are a violation of federal law.

Denver-In a decision that could hamstring prosecutors, a federal appeals
court ruled that it is illegal for the government to promise leniency to
witnesses in exchange for testimony.

The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in a 3-0 ruling Wednesday that
the practice amounts to buying testimony. The court said its decision will
not "drastically alter" the government's practices, but lawyers disagreed.

"This is a bombshell," said Denver defence attorney Larry Pozner."This hits
the government right where they live. This is how the government is
operating, and we have said for 40 years, if you say to somebody in criminal
trouble, 'I'll give you a free pass, or I'll let you go if you tell me the
story I want to hear,' they'll tell you whatever they need to say to get out
of trouble."

Mike Norten,former U.S. attorney in Denver, said that if the decision
stands, it will have "a tremendously negative impact on the government's
ability to investigate and prosecute crimes by groups-conspiracy, drug
trafficking, money laundering, securities fraud and health-care fraud."

Norton said prosecutors offer immunity or plea bargains to lower-level
participants in exchange for testimony against their superiors.

Circuit Judge Paul J.Kelly Jr. said such deals violate federal law.

"The government may still make deals with accomplices for their assistance
other than testimony, and it may still put accomplices on the stand; it
simply may not attach any promise, offer or gift to their testimony," the
court said.

The law states that anyone who directly or indirectly "gives, offers or
promises anything of value to any person for or because of testimony...shall
be fined... or imprisoned for not more than two years, or both," Kelly said.

"One of the very oldest principles of our legal heritage is that the king is
subject to the law. King John was taught this principle at Runnymede in
A.D.1215, when his barons forced him to submit to Magna Carta, the great
charter that imposed limits on the exercise of sovereign power."

The ruling came in the case of a Wichita, Kan., woman who was accused of
being part of a cocaine trafficking ring. The woman's conviction was based
in large part on the testimony of another person involved in the conspiracy,
Napoleon Douglas.

The appeals court said Douglas was promised leniency in exchange for his
cooperation and testimony. Leniency is something of value, wrote the court,
and therefore illegal as part of a deal for testimony.

The government did not specifically tell Douglas that it would seek a
reduced sentence for him, but promised it wouldn't prosecute him for other
offenses and would tell both the sentencing judge and his parole board about
his cooperation, the court said.

Checked-by: Melodi Cornett