Prosecutor Says She Was Pressured On Case
Sharon Eubanks Tells Bob Schieffer That Political Appointees Interfered With Tobacco Ruling
-
Play CBS Video Video Eye To Eye: Sharon Eubanks Only On The Web: Former Justice Department prosecutor Sharon Banks tells Bob Schieffer that high-level political appointees pressured her to go easy in a lawsuit against tobacco companies.
-
Video Former DOJ Attorney Speaks Out Sharon Eubanks, a former attorney at the Department of Justice, tells Bob Schieffer in an exclusive interview that she quit because high-level political appointees interfered with one of her cases.
-
Former federal prosecutor Sharon Eubanks says she was pressured by political appointees. (CBS)
-
Interactive 110th Congress The balance of power shifts and new leadership takes control as the latest session convenes.
"They actually drafted for me for a position to take on a smoking-cessation remedy, which would reduce what the government had been seeking in the case from $130 billion to $10 billion, without any explanation," former federal prosecutor Sharon Eubanks tells CBS News chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer in an exclusive interview.
Eubanks was the lead lawyer when the government sued the tobacco companies for covering up the dangers of smoking. The case is currently on appeal, but it was the largest civil suit ever filed, and she says that when high-level political appointees at the Justice Department concluded she was about to win and force the big tobacco companies to lay out billions to help smokers break the habit, they stopped her.
She says they ordered a drastic cutback in the settlement she wanted, dictated her final argument and ordered her to read it, told her to drop her demand that key company officials be removed and ordered her to force key witnesses to change their stories.
"It was more what they didn't want them to say," Eubanks says of the witnesses' testimony.
Eubanks first told part of the story to The Washington Post, and it has already caused a furor at the capital. But what she finds odd is that despite the enormity of the case, she never discussed it with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
Why not? "I think perhaps to be able to say, as he has said with the firings of the U.S. Attorneys, 'I didn't know what was going on.' Well, he need look no further than the mirror. He's responsible for that," Eubanks says.
Internal investigators at the Justice Department concluded nothing improper took place during the case. But Congress isn't satisfied — and Eubanks is headed to Capitol Hill to tell her story.
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."





I'm devastated. My faith in the system has been dealt a serious blow...
"Ain't politics grand?"
Posted by rikedoid at 12:33 PM : Mar 24, 2007
I think the point is that we need to return the Government to a more centrailzed way of dealing with the things around us. We should NOT vote for people, regardless of religion, who will not stear this nation in a neutral and centraist fashion.
http://www.tobacco-on-trial.com/2006/08/08/insights-into-usa-v-philip-morris-et-al-from-sharon-eubanks/
This is the same government that denies Global warming, in order to protect Exxon and other energy companies, no matter what the catastrophic result is to this world.
Good on you Georgie, fill yours and your cohorts pockets with as much money as is possible, before it all comes to an end.
I'm devastated. My faith in the system has been dealt a serious blow...
"Ain't politics grand?"
I believe that many of the cases like this one should be reviewed (in public), and that some cases may need to be tried again because of corruption.
This era will leave a legacy of cases that are suspect because of the corruption.
All Democrats and Republicans (and especially all lawyers) should deplore what has happened and demand to know the facts in this and other cases.
Why is this pathetic story a lead story ? Iran has captured Brits in open waters !
How about looking in Conn Sen Dodd running for President, and getting campaign contributions from people and companies coming before his committee. He gets to keep all that money personally when he retires. What is that all about, if not a potential scandal. He has no hope of being nominated, and he knows it. !
- by macusweil March 23, 2007 10:07 PM EDT
- Can you say "tip of the neo.con treachery iceberg" ?
- Reply to this comment
See all 11 Comments