(Guest-posted by Brad Jacobson of MediaBloodhound)
Remember the CO US Attorney who called all the men arrested in the suspected assassination plot in Denver “just a bunch of meth heads” and said their actions failed to meet the legal standard for “true threat”?
Well, I did a little digging. OK, a lot of digging. And here’s just the beginning of what I found, as reported in my investigative piece over at Raw Story:
Interviews with numerous legal experts suggest that Colorado US Attorney Troy Eid misled reporters and diverged from state law when declining to prosecute any of the three men arrested in Denver for threatening to assassinate Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.
The exclusive not only brings to bear the views of some of the top legal minds in the country but also leading experts in narcotics, inside sources close to the investigation and, of course, the CO US Attorney’s office, the FBI and the Secret Service. It also includes comments from the Weld County CO investigator who pursued the prime suspect, Sean Robert Adolph, for two years:
According to a federal affidavit, one of the men arrested, Nathan Dwaine Johnson, said that another in the group, Sean Robert Adolph, had come to Denver to shoot Obama during his DNC acceptance speech. Johnson told the Secret Service that Adolph said "it wouldn't matter if he killed Obama because he was going to jail on his pending felony charges anyway."
Vicki Harbert, an investigator at the Weld County, Colo., sheriff's department, who had pursued Adolph since 2006, told RAW STORY, "It's very easy to see Adolph saying something like that. He had nothing to lose. With his criminal history, he was going to jail for the rest of his life."
Find out what else Harbert feared, why she believes Adolph “was not your normal criminal,” and a whole lot more. Read the full article at Raw Story.
Plus, in a related exclusive over at MediaBloodhound (couldn’t fit into Raw Story piece): Who was the only mainstream reporter on record to voice skepticism about the CO US Attorney’s handling of this case? Where did he talk about it (hint: not in the pages of his employer's widely read national publication, in which he’d written about the case)? And why have you never heard about it? Get this scoop over at MediaBloodhound.