<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

[IP] more on Don't talk to Feds: Stark warning about scientist who tried to do the right thing





Begin forwarded message:

From: Titus Brown <titus@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: June 1, 2005 11:22:15 AM EDT
To: David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [IP] more on Don't talk to Feds: Stark warning about scientist who tried to do the right thing


-> Begin forwarded message:
->
-> From: John Levine <johnl@xxxxxxxx>
-> Date: June 1, 2005 10:23:35 AM EDT
-> To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
-> Cc: Declan McCullagh <declan@xxxxxxxx>
-> Subject: Re: [IP] Don't talk to Feds: Stark warning about scientist
-> who tried to do the right thing
->
->
-> >[If the facts are as the ProMED editors claim they are (and ProMED is
-> >a respectable source), this is beyond a disgrace. The federal agents
-> >and prosecutors responsible for this outcome should be the ones
-> >dishonored, fined, and imprisoned. Of course they're not. Remember,
-> >it is rarely in your own interest to cooperate with the Feds without
-> >a lawyer's involvement. If people begin to understand this, perhaps
-> >some good can come from Dr. Butler's travails. --Declan]
-> >
->
-> Google News says there's an article in the May 26 "Science" about his
-> appeal, but you need to be a subscriber to see it.  Perhaps someone
-> who subs can tell us what happened.

Dave, here you are:

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/308/5726/1241b

SCIENCE AND THE LAW:
Butler Gets Break on Pending Appeal
Jocelyn Kaiser

Infectious-disease researcher Thomas Butler will be back in the headlines next month when a federal appeals court in New Orleans, Louisiana, hears his request to overturn his conviction for fraud and mishandling plague samples. Butler, who was sentenced to 2 years in prison, became a cause célèbre for scientists worried about the government's zeal to combat bioterrorism. Legal experts say his appeal faces an uphill fight. But it's less risky than it once seemed now that the federal government has dropped a counter-appeal seeking an even stiffer sentence.

Butler, 63, was arrested in January 2003 after he reported that 30 vials of plague bacteria were missing from his lab at Texas Tech University in Lubbock, and the incident escalated into a bioterror scare. He was later charged with 69 criminal counts, including mishandling samples, tax evasion, and lying to investigators. A jury acquitted him of 22 charges but convicted him of violating export rules on shipping a package of bacteria and of steering clinical research payments to himself rather than to Texas Tech (Science, 19 December 2003, p. 2054). In March 2004, a federal judge, citing Butler's contributions to humanity, sentenced him to 2 years rather than the 9-year term specified by federal sentencing guidelines.

In August, Butler asked the appeals court to overturn the conviction or order a new trial. The move triggered a cross-appeal from prosecutors arguing that his reduced sentence violated federal sentencing guidelines (Science, 22 October 2004, p. 590). Fortunately for Butler, the U.S. Supreme Court in January declared that the sentencing guidelines are not mandatory. The decision, United States v. Booker, led the government to withdraw its cross-appeal, which was dismissed on 1 March. However, Butler could still receive a longer sentence if a new jury reaches different conclusions, notes Larry Cunningham, a Texas Tech law professor. "It's not a given that he would be entitled to a better sentence," he says.

Butler's supporters are hoping for vindication. In a commentary in the 1 June issue of Clinical Infectious Diseases, 14 scientists and physicians call for his release so that "common sense [can] prevail." Lead author Barbara E. Murray of the University of Texas Medical School in Houston worries that a similar fate could befall any researcher. "We're in an environment in which if somebody wanted to get us, they could," she says.

In his appeal, Butler argues that the trial was flawed by six "legal errors," including trying him on charges related to his handling of the plague samples and his financial dealings simultaneously, relying on vague university policies to find criminal fraud, and refusing to allow certain university e-mails and testimony. The government responded that the charges were "properly joined" because they showed a "scheme" to defraud the university and that the testimony and documents were "immaterial." Its brief also asserts that the university policies weren't critical to his fraud conviction because Butler's "secretive, self-serving conduct was ample to show he had the intent to defraud." Cunningham says that "very few criminal cases get reversed" by the Fifth Circuit Court.

Meanwhile, Butler's attorneys and family are hoping that he will be released by Christmas. A legal defense fund is helping to support his appeal, which is being handled at a reduced rate by Jonathan Turley of George Washington University Law School in Washington, D.C., and attorneys from Bryan Cave LLP. The initial trial cost Butler's family $1 million, Turley notes.



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/