Senator Harkin on U.S. Attorney Nominee and Postville
Here is one reader’s critical reaction to the interview:
“Senator Harkin appears surprised, a bit flustered, as well as offended and very defensive that he is being asked about his selection of S. Rose. He actually takes a swipe at an unnamed people who are stiring-up claims about Rose and who weren’t even part of the Postville case.
Harkin again offers nothing but the slim reed of his endorsement of Rose based on his staffs shallow review and the “letter” sent to him by defense attorneys who represented workers at Postville. Harkin claims these attorneys are the ones who can really vouch for what a great attorney she was during the Postville prosecutions. He claims she went out her way to help the Postville workers in the prosecutions–HOGWASH!
This amounts to nothing more that Harkin spin. Neither he nor his staff have not spoke to the people of Postville and the experts who testified before the Congressional Postville hearing about the many constitutional violations that occurred during the Postville Prosecutions.
Harkin again completely failed to hold Rose accountable for any thing bad that has happened in the Northern District office during her tenure including her role in the Postville prosecutions despite the fact that she was in a leadership role in the office. As far as Harkin is concerned, Postville was the Immaculate Prosecution. He again never once condemned the Postville Prosecutions–in fact, he again basically ignored the U.S. Attorney’s Office’s conduct in the matter entirely.
When Stephanie Rose was asked about her role at Postville by the Waterloo paper . She defended the raid and prosecutions saying “executing the massive operation required amazing effort and a ton of good work.” (See Waterloo Courier article April 5, 2009.) Clearly, the 300 some plea agreements negotiated by Stephanie Rose were calculated to take advantage of the workers worry about families they had been supporting with their wages. Almost all workers were represented by lawyers with little or no immigration expertise that were forced to represent on average 17 workers during a very short period of time.
Clearly this was premeditated and calculated to force the workers to waive all rights and submit to the criminal charges and then deportation after serving five months in prison. Stephanie Rose is apparently blind to the fact that the Postville workers were begging to be released to go support their families in Guatemala . Her “ton of good work” really amounted to ramming these cases through before anyone could raise an effective defense.
Did Rose ever raise her voice in opposition to the Northern District’s use of coercive prosecutorial tactics against the Postville workers? Even Privately?
Why not clear up the issue of Stephanie Rose’s role and release all emails and memos that describe her role? Likewise, she should volunteer to answer questions under oath about her Postville role and her views on basic criminal justice issues.
Even if it is true that Stephanie Rose played no direct policy role in the Postville prosecutions, she was still acting according to her oath as an officer of the court and as a federal prosecutor.
Ethically and morally, her hands were not tied once she was given her Postville prosecution assignment to negotiate the “exploding” seven-day plea agreements with attorneys representing the workers. Even if the “raid was initiated by Washington,” or other prosecution designed by other prosecutors in her own office, as Chief Deputy of the Criminal Division and as an Assistant United States Attorney, Rose still had ethical duties. It was her responsibility to carefully review and scrutinize each prosecution for any ethical or constitutional due process problems once she became involved as an officer of the court. The ethical and constitutional issues created by the Postville prosecutions were numerous and should have been obvious to her. Stephanie Rose was not able to understand the numerous defects in the prosecutions, she chose to overlook the defects or she just plain failed to see any problems with the prosecutions as executed. Any one of these conclusions raises serious questions about her judgment and fitness to be a United States Attorney at this point in her career.
Rose’s record at best, even without the Postville Prosecutions, was mediocre, her role in the prosecutions is more than troubling but her unqualified support for the Postville Prosecutions and ICE raid tactics even with the benefit of hindsight makes her nomination a complete disgrace. Harkin never has commented on that aspect of her record.”
KJ