"Michael Nighan couldn't believe his eyes. As Global Crossing's North America director of regulatory affairs, one of Nighan's tasks was to review all of the startup telco's marketing and sales material. But what confused him in late 1999 was a map of Global Crossing's network that showed a fiber-optic loop around the continent of Africa. "What's this?" asked Nighan. He was told it was Africa One, an undersea broadband cable that Global Crossing planned to build for a group of telecom carriers. "But I said it didn't belong on a map of our network because one, it doesn't exist, and two, even if it did exist, it wouldn't belong to us," says Nighan, who left Global Crossing last November. The response Nighan got was, "Gary (CEO Gary Winnick) wants it there." So it stayed on the map." - Fortune Magazine,"Global Crossing: The Emperor of Greed" - June 24, 2002
The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment guarantees a criminal defendant the right “to be confronted
with the witnesses against him.” U.S. Const. amend. VI.
The
Supreme Court has explained that the right of confrontation
“means more than being allowed to confront the witness
physically.” Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308, 315 (1974).
Rather, “[t]he main and essential purpose of confrontation is
to secure for the opponent the opportunity of cross examination.”
Id. at 315-16
“[The Confrontation Clause] guaranteed a defendant’s right
to confront those ‘who bear testimony’ against him.” (quoting
Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 51 (2004)
But then again, I'm officially nutzzzzzz, until certified un-nutzzzzzz in a competent court of the law. So I am waiting on the law, and the certificate required by the law. But I'm no expert.(.pdf) Anyone see ours, yet?
On the flip side of the coin, the federal minimum wage went up to $6.55. WOOT!! That means the minimum wage earner will work 37 minutes to buy a four dollar gallon of gas, which might take him 20 miles home, if he's lucky. So what's a poor working stiff to do? A 20-mile commute is a long slog on a Wal-Mart bicycle.
Gary Winnick, the Global Crossing chairman, has
no such problems. In California, he was renovating his
$94 million palatial estate. You can't see much from the ground, but
an aerial view offers the full majesty of a home with 15 bedrooms and
17 bathrooms is overlooking the Bel Air Country Club.
PUBLIC DEFENDER BILL HARRIS: All right. Well, we assert that it is.
As far, Your Honor, as far, just ask the court to consider one
thing. As far as the political ramifications of this, we have
posited the possibility what if Schmoe was Winnick or some other
high ranking official of Global Crossing tied in closely to the
upper reaches of the Democratic party.
What if, there's no way I can find that out because
he's hiding behind a pseudonym. Some of the grammar I'll admit
doesn't sound like and educated guy in the upper hierarchy but I
don't know that. It could be. And if it was and there was a
lack of prosecution on this record I think we have made out our
burden. If discovery shows that Schmoe was Winnick for example,
I mean the decision, it would be political dynamite to prosecute
Winnick in this case. In addition to the strategic problems of
having what that would do to this case. It's clear to me that a
decision to prosecute --
JUDGE MATZ: "I've got Gary Winnick under
subpoena. I'd like to tell Mr. Winnick he doesn't have to
appear. That took a lot of hoops to get the CEO under subpoena.
Killercop wanted that."
PUBLIC DEFENDER BILL HARRIS: "So if this trial is going to be continued, one
of the things that 1'11 want to do is somehow withdraw that in a
manner that we can get Mr. Winnick again, if and when.
JUDGE MATZ: I can arrange that. He's not listed as a
witness for the government. There are 24 people.
MR. HARRIS: Is he on the government's list?
JUDGE MATZ: No. I'm telling you that he's not, not the
list I was just handed today. Now I want to know what happened
with respect to these stipulations.
MR. HARRIS: Killercop wouldn't cooperate and
basically told me he didn't want to sign anything.
THE DEFENDANT: Objection.
MS. DUARTE: Question, Your Honor.
JUDGE MATZ: There's one other thing, before you ask
your question, before I forget. There is a subpoena that
apparently has been served on Gary Winnick. I notice that Gary
Winnick is not identified on the government's witness list. And
I assume, correct me if I'm wrong, that the government has the
ability to communicate with Mr. Winnick or with his lawyer; is
that correct?
JUDGE MATZ: I want you to communicate to the lawyer or
to Mr. Winnick or to both, that although he doesn't have to respond to the subpoena on the date or under the terms that it
may have contained, he remains responsible to respond on
whatever date he is later notified.
In effect, what I'm saying is that the subpoena,
although it was issued and served through the auspices of Mr. Harris, it's like a court subpoena. I don't want anybody to
have to go through any protracted or new ground of efforts to
subpoena him anew.
So the subpoena remains outstanding, although the trial
date has been continued. Please communicate that to Mr. Winnick
and his lawyer.
DUARTE: I'm sorry, Your Honor, yes, very
briefly.
I just had a procedural point while Mr. Nicolaysen
was still up here. In terms of the subpoenas, early on in the
case, when Mr. Harris was representing Mr. Sutcliffe, the court
had ordered me to ensure that Mr. Gary Winnick, who had been
subpoenaed by Mr. Harris, was made available. Mr. Nicolaysen
had indicated to me that that availability was no longer
necessary or required. So I have indicated that to
Mr. Winnick's attorney, and he is not under my subpoena
anymore.
I just wanted to make that clear because that was
kind of left hanging, and I don't think there's any written
communication that would be in the file between myself and
Mr. Nicolaysen on that point.
