Questions remain on Cooper case

A few weeks ago in a post about the Nathan Cooper case, I raised the question as to whether Cooper could be providing the feds with information on other matters under investigation. Yesterday, after several delays, Cooper was finally sentenced. Back in August, both the US Attorney, Jim Crowe, and Cooper's lawyer stated that sentencing guidelines indicated Cooper would serve 30 to 37 months, however, Cooper was only sentenced to 15 months. With good behaviour, Cooper may only serve 13 months.

So what happened? Cooper cooperated in a sting operation which led to the indictment of Omega "Meg" Paulite of Seattle, however, those charges were later dropped. In addition, Cooper's cooperation on this sting was known back in August when both attorneys indicated Cooper was likely to face a 30 to 37 month sentence and Cooper's cooperation was factored into their prediction. Why then did the Judge only sentence Cooper to 15 months?

Speculation centers around 32 letters that were mailed to the Judge prior to sentencing requesting leniency for Cooper. These letters have been sealed by the court. This is not required but is the practice of the Eastern District according to Jim Crowe, the prosecuter in the Cooper case. In a recent case out of the District Court in East St. Louis dealing with a prominent St. Louis crimnal defense attorney, Frank Fabbri , letters written on his behalf were not sealed and some of the actual letters were made available by the Riverfront Times. Keeping the letters sealed in Cooper's case, especially when he received what appears to be a favorable sentence, only leads to further speculation of favoritism for an elected official.

Another troubling aspect of this case is that the feds allowed Cooper to be re elected to the Missouri House of Representatives after he was caught. Randy Turner, of the Turner Report, asks; "Why did the federal government allow the residents of Cooper's Cape Girardeau district to elect a criminal?" Great question. Turner points out that if it was because of the sting on Paulite the feds wasted their time since the charges against her were quickly dropped. According to Crowe, the case was delayed because of the investigation into the Blunt Administration's handling of fee offices, however, once again nothing came of this investigation either.

Maybe Cooper provided the feds with information on some matter we are unaware of and, if so, this might explain the strange way his case was handled. If so we should learn about this at a later date, however, if this is all there is we deserve answers now.