Morrison v. Olsen, et al., 487 U.S. 654, 728 (1988)(Scalia, J., Dissenting) (quotingthen-Attorney General Robert Jackson, The Federal Prosecutor, Address Delivered at theSecond Annual Conference of United States Attorneys (April 1, 1940)).The concept of fairness embodied in the Fifth Amendment due process guarantee isviolated by government action that is fundamentally unfair or shocking to our traditionalsense of justice, See Kinsella v. United States ex rel. Singleton, 361 U.S. 234, 246(1960), or conduct that is ‘so outrageous’ that common notions of fairness and decencywould be offended were judicial process invoked to obtain a conviction against theaccused. United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973).” Schmidt v. UnitedStates, 105F.3d 82, 91 (2d Cir. 1997). The Second Circuit, as have other Circuits, hasrepeatedly acknowledged that a claim seeking dismissal for outrageous governmentalconduct not only exists but could, in principle, prevail. See, e.g., United States v.Rahman, 189 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 1999); United States v. Schmidt, 105 F.3d 82, 91 (2d Cir.1997); United States v. Ascenscio, 873 F.2d 639,640 (2D Cir. 1989); United States v. Nunez-Rios, 622 F. 2d 1093, 1098 (2d Cir. 1980)As far as we have been able to determine, the particularly odious governmentalconduct here is
, never have been addressed by our courts. But, by anymeasuring standard the targeting of an individual by the Executive without any lawenforcement or security justification, the relentless pursuit of that individual by agovernmental law enforcement agency intent, before any investigation or accusation,upon bringing that person down is, in itself, outrageous governmental conduct. And, theconviction of that person by means of crucial perjured testimony from a governmentcooperator and paid for bounty hunters, the falsity of which must have been apparent tothe DEA agents and the prosecutors, only adds to the egregiousness. The matter of United States v. Viktor Bout is, in my respectful opinion before This Court and theUnited States Federal Bar, is so corrosive precisely because it took place in the UnitedStates, the uncontested symbol of democracy, freedom and justice. We exemplify the promise of the future for the world. Politically and physically we struggle against‘backward’ countries dominated by authoritarian regimes that prosecute based uponcolor, creed, religion, politics and/or vindictiveness.The targeting of Viktor Bout putting him “in the cross-hairs,” of a plandesigned to deprive him of his liberty and, without justification, prosecute him in aUnited States courtroom, for a non-crime concocted by agents of the United Statesgovernment for that very purpose; was initiated by the National Security Agency or theWhite House and carried out by the United States Drug Enforcement Agency, for purely political reasons. I respectfully suggest, it is in the best interest of our nationand the developing world to reexamine the matter of United Sates v. Viktor Bout. So pitiful was our country’s case against him that based upon the evidence he shouldhave been acquitted. But, as this letter will attempt demonstrate, Bout, an innocentman, was destined to be crushed by lies, not made known conspiracies and prejudice before an American Jury. (We do not intend to suggest that Viktor Bout is an angel.