Justice Department's Public Integrity section questioned over Stevens dismissal

WASHINGTON - The dismissal of the government's case against former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens is the latest blow to the reputation of the Justice Department's once-venerated Public Integrity section.

This small prosecutors' office does not pursue cases against terrorists or bank robbers. Instead, its job is to weigh allegations of corruption involving public officials and to decide whether to bring criminal charges. The targets include city councilmen, state legislators, governors, judges, or, in this instance, a senior member of the U.S. Senate.

Attorney Gen. Eric Holder Wednesday abandoned the case against Stevens, despite his conviction by a jury. Holder said he acted "in the interest of justice" after discovering prosecutors had illegally withheld evidence from the defense.

For decades, the Public Integrity unit was known as highly professional and thoroughly non-partisan. But the Bush administration came under criticism in recent years for bringing what many lawyers thought were questionable charges against prominent Democrats, including former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman. He was convicted, not of taking bribes or campaign contributions, but rather of appointing to a state board a wealthy donor who helped fund a campaign in favor of a state education lottery. Siegelman's conviction was recently affirmed by an appeals court in Atlanta.

Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee are investigating those cases. They said last year they saw a troubling pattern of "politicized" prosecutions. They plan to question President George W. Bush's one-time aides Karl Rove and Harriet Miers.

Last year, the Public Integrity section quieted some of the criticism from Democratic partisans when it brought criminal charges against Stevens, the Senate's senior Republican. But that case had its flaws as well.

The veteran lawmaker was not charged with taking bribes or payoffs in exchange for favors. Rather, he was indicted for failing to disclose as gifts the full value of the repairs and improvements on one of his Alaska homes.

And the Public Integrity unit's top prosecutors were accused of cutting corners and concealing evidence from defense attorneys in their zeal to convict Stevens.

Throughout the trial, U.S District Judge Emmet Sullivan voiced his anger with prosecutors. "How can the court have the confidence that the public integrity section has public integrity?" he said. "This is not a trial any means." In February, the judge called the prosecution's conduct "outrageous," and he took the highly unusual step of holding in contempt William Welch II, the chief of the Public Integrity section, and his principal deputy, Brenda Morris, the lead prosecutor in the Stevens case.

Brendan Sullivan, the lawyer for Stevens, said the prosecutors were so "hell-bent" on winning a conviction they were "willing to present false evidence." He accused them of "corruption."

New York human rights lawyer Scott Horton, a critic of the Bush administration's prosecution, said he hopes Holder casts the same skeptical eye on other cases, including Siegelman's. He noted Holder's first job after law school was in the Justice Department's Public Integrity section.

"I think he is very worried about what happened there. We had roughly two dozen controversial cases come out of that section," Horton said. "And you see the same pattern: suppression of evidence from the defense, playing cases to the public. There was a victory-at-all-costs mentality."