Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsMckay

Counsel's Report on Ed Meese

July 27, 1988

As a practicing criminal defense attorney, a registered Democrat and a card-carrying member of the American Civil Liberties Union, I have never before found myself aligned with Meese on any issue. Now, however, I find myself compelled to write in support of the viewpoint recently expressed by Meese concerning the conduct of independent counsel McKay.

If I understand Meese correctly, he contends it is improper for McKay, as a representative of the government, to publicly accuse Meese of specific criminal acts without affording Meese an opportunity to confront his accusers and a forum in which to vindicate himself. Indeed, Meese suggested the Justice Department would fire a prosecutor for doing what McKay had done. Meese seems to be saying that traditional notions of due process and fair play require the government to abstain from publicly branding someone a criminal unless formal charges are contemplated, thereby giving the accused a forum in which to present his defense.

I advanced the identical argument approximately 10 years ago on behalf of an individual who had been publicly branded an organized crime figure by a commission appointed by then California Atty. Gen. Evelle Younger. In that case, as in the case of Meese, no formal charges were contemplated. Ironically, the vice chairman of the commission which made the accusations was Edwin Meese III.

I trust that Meese has belatedly recognized and now acknowledges that each of us is subject to the deprivation of precious constitutional rights and civil liberties if we fail to remain ever vigilant to guard against such deprivations by those in power. I welcome his change of view, tardy as it may be for my former client.

FLOYD J. SIEGAL

West Los Angeles

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|