|Special Prosecutor Dan Sigler|
"... But Sigler said he and his team will talk about "the defendant's character and condition," including his comments during the Fox interview.
"Particularly in light of his post-conviction press interview," Sigler said, "we do not see much in the way of mitigation, and we will point that out to the court."
In that interview, White called the jury's verdict "a total miscarriage of justice" and "a perversion." He also accused other politicians, including Gov. Mitch Daniels, of voter fraud.
Brizzi said he's not surprised that prosecutors plan to use the interview against White. However, he said, he hopes people understand that White's comments were made out of "frustration" and "human emotion."Dan Sigler should be ashamed of himself. As reported by Gary Welsh of Advance Indiana, Sigler could also have faced the same voter fraud and perjury charges he leveled against White. As far as other politicians, White is 100% correct that Even Bayh, Sen. Richard Lugar, Governor Mitch Daniels and their wives all vote using Indianapolis addresses when they all admittedly don't live in Marion County. With regard to Senator Lugar, it is particularly appalling as he doesn't even own the house he claims as his "residence," having sold it 35 years ago.
White's prosecution was a political persecution. Both parties wanted him out of office, the Democrats because they want to claim it for the second place finisher, Vop Osili, the Republicans because they didn't want to trouble themselves defending Charlie White and Republican Governor Daniels would be able to appoint his own person to the position.
White is exactly, 100% correct that the voter fraud/perjury laws were applied unequally. They were out to get White, evidenced by the fact he's probably the only person in history ever prosecuted for perjury for the address he put on a marriage application. Of course, Indiana law requires that the false statement be material for perjury, but that didn't stop Sigler from prosecuting the charge anyway.
At the end of the day, White lost because he didn't put on evidence at trial like he did at the Commission. The jury foreman strongly suggested that such evidence would have resulted in his acquittal. Nonetheless, the point White made is exactly on point. Not a single legal expert has come forward with a credible explanation justifying why White gets prosecuted and others doing exactly the same thing gets a pass. Indiana is a state where criminal laws are applied to the politically unpopular, while popular politicians get a pass. That's not aCharlie White's embarassment. That's our embarassment as Hoosiers.