Fraudster Schabir Shaik was convicted unfairly and was used as a "dry run" by the State ahead of charges being laid against ex-deputy president Jacob Zuma, his lawyer told the Constitutional Court. "It was thoroughly, completely unfair for one man to be used as a dry run by the State while his co-conspirators were available to stand trial," Shaik’s defence counsel Martin Brassey argued yesterday.

His bone of contention was that Shaik stood trial and is serving a 15-year-jail sentence in the absence of his co-conspirators — former deputy president Zuma and French Arms deal boss Alain Thetard, of Thint Companies. "Can you imagine the quality of the trial if the country’s deputy president Jacob Zuma entered the dock and said I want to tell you that Shaik helped me comrade to comrade and that he was my best friend?" asked Brassey. Shaik is applying for leave to appeal against his convictions on two counts of corruption and one of fraud.

The charges related to payments that Shaik made to former deputy president Jacob Zuma in order to secure political influence.

"None of you will leave this Bench without knowing that what happened to Shaik was unfair," said a visibly emotional Brassey. "It was thoroughly, completely unfair for one man to be used as a dry run by the State when his co-conspirators were available," he said while banging his hands on the podium.

Last Week, US Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) predicted that Gonzales would resign soon as a result of the US Attorney firings, and said over the weekend that he believed the resignation would come before the no-confidence vote. Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) has also called for Gonzales' resignation after hearing testimony from former US Deputy Attorney General James Comey regarding an attempt by Gonzales to persuade former Attorney General John Ashcroft to authorize the warrantless domestic surveillance program while he was incapacitated in the hospital, critically ill with pancreatitis. Although the event did not relate to the US Attorney firings, Hagel said that it showed Gonzales lacked the "moral authority to lead" the DOJ.

California will resume sending an estimated 8,000 prisoners to other states next month after an appeals court ruled that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger can do so while he challenges a prior ruling that halted the transfers.

Schwarzenegger praised the decision by the Third District Appellate Court, which was filed late last week and announced Monday, saying it would let the state take a critical step toward reducing prison overcrowding. Critics, however, warned that shipping inmates against their will could be dangerous for guards, prisoners and the public.

For the governor, the decision couldn't have come soon enough. Three judges have scheduled separate hearings next month to consider appointing a panel that could cap the state's inmate population—which could potentially order the release of thousands of prisoners. The state now has 172,000 prisoners living in space designed for fewer than 100,000.

Schwarzenegger issued a statement saying the transfers will help California avoid the court-ordered release of dangerous felons and even increase safety for overburdened guards.

"Out of state transfers will improve the safety of California's institutions for our correctional officers and staff as well as the inmates, and will provide much needed space for rehabilitation programs," Schwarzenegger said. "Transferring of inmates out of state is a critical component of the state's overall plan to relieve overcrowding."

The decision follows the Legislature's approval in April of a $7.8 billion plan also designed to help stave off a federal takeover. The plan calls for heavy state borrowing to pay for adding 53,000 new beds, as well as boosting education, job training and other rehabilitation programs. The plan also authorizes the governor to continue transferring inmates out of state until 2011 to relieve overcrowding.

Lance Corcoran, spokesman for the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, which sued the state over the transfers and prevailed in a Sacramento County Superior Court in February, said the transfers will expose guards to serious dangers.

He pointed to a riot in an Indiana prison last month as evidence. That riot, involving about 500 inmates, apparently began after prisoners recently transferred from Arizona refused to return to their living quarters.

"Inmates who are forced to leave the jurisdictions in which their families have the opportunity to visit them creates a very volatile situation that's unsafe for the inmates, unsafe for the guards, and unsafe for the public," Corcoran said.

California transferred 353 inmates out of state before Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Gail Ohanesian ruled in February that the transfers appeared to violate the state's emergency act and a provision in the state constitution.

Those inmates are in Tennessee and Arizona.

According to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, inmates sent in June could go to facilities in Tallahatchie, Mississippi or near Oklahoma City.

Corrections plans to send 300 in June and ramp up shipments of 400 to 500 inmates a month by the fall.

Assemblyman Todd Spitzer, R-Orange, chairman of the Assembly Select Committee on Prison Construction and Operations, said he plans to hold hearings next month on the safety of the transfers.

"I have some concerns about Corrections being able to do this without officer injuries."

But Spitzer said Monday's ruling was great news because out-of-state transfers are the only way to prevent early releases.

"We hold that such a complaint should be dismissed," Justice David Souter wrote for the court majority.

At issue is a class action lawsuit against Bell Atlantic, which contends that lack of competition for local telephone service and "parallel conduct" of the regional Bells were evidence of an antitrust conspiracy.

More than a decade after the court-ordered breakup of AT&T into seven regional Bells, Congress passed a landmark legislation in 1996 designed to foster competition among carriers. It required regional Bells such as Verizon to make their networks available to rivals in exchange for gaining access to the lucrative long-distance voice and data markets.

The case was dismissed by a district court judge, who said the plaintiffs could not sue based only on a "bare-bones" allegation of conspiracy.

But that decision was reversed by a federal appeals court in New York, which ruled the case should not be dismissed unless the charges were implausible.

The U.S. Justice Department's antitrust division has sided with the telephone companies, arguing that "parallel action and inaction" alone was not enough to provide a basis for an antitrust lawsuit.

The Supreme Court's majority opinion agreed, ruling that an allegation of parallel conduct and a bare assertion of conspiracy is not enough. There must be enough facts to suggest an agreement was made, Souter said.

The three pleaded guilty in February to conspiracy involving submission of $716,677 in false debris hauling tickets.

Kitto submitted the tickets, while Robertson signed them, in most instances at her home, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office. Miller collected and submitted the slips for reimbursement.

Prosecutors said Kitto admitted he tried to conceal the conspiracy by depositing the money in a bank account opened under an employee's name.

Miller paid Robertson for signing the slip and also offered her extra "hush money," prosecutors said.

Meanwhile, W.C. Blackmon of Canton pleaded guilty Friday in federal court in Jackson to filing a false FEMA claim for Katrina disaster assistance funds.

U.S. Attorney Dunn Lampton said FEMA mailed $14,470 to an address in Biloxi, based on a false statement from Blackmon claiming hurricane damage to items there.

Blackmon will be sentenced July 27. He faces a maximum five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

Hoping to pounce on Gonzales's sagging support among Senate Republicans, Sens. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said they will offer the no-confidence resolution on the Senate floor as early as next week.

The resolution would have no force of law, but Democrats hope it would raise the political stakes for Gonzales and for Republicans who vote to support him.

"Any faith that he can run or manage the department is gone," Schumer said. "It's going to be very surprising if we get fewer than 60 votes."

Gonzales continued to lose backing yesterday among GOP lawmakers as Norm Coleman (Minn.) became the sixth Senate Republican to call for his resignation. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) predicted Gonzales will resign once Congress completes an inquiry into the firings because he is "unable to perform his duties."

"I have a sense that when we finish our investigation, we may have a conclusion of the tenure of the attorney general," Specter said.

Gonzales has been under siege for four months because of Justice's shifting explanations for the prosecutor dismissals last year. Documents released by the department showed the effort was based in part on their loyalty to the Bush administration and its policies.

The attorney general was further damaged by testimony Tuesday from former deputy attorney general James B. Comey, who described how Gonzales, then the White House counsel, attempted to persuade then-Attorney General John D. Ashcroft to reauthorize a terrorism surveillance program while Ashcroft was in intensive care recovering from surgery.

The Justice Department had deemed the secret warrantless program illegal, and Comey, as acting attorney general, refused to renew it. Comey, Ashcroft, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III and others threatened to resign before President Bush intervened, Comey testified.

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) said Bush "should obviously seriously consider" firing Gonzales over the 2004 incident.

Bush, who has strongly supported Gonzales, declined to comment yesterday on whether he ordered Gonzales and Andrew H. Card Jr., then Bush's chief of staff, to make the hospital visit.

In another challenge to Gonzales yesterday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) and subcommittee chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) called on the Justice Department to widen the circle of lawmakers briefed on the surveillance program.

In a joint letter, they said that if the administration refuses to share information on the eavesdropping program with the Judiciary Committee, it would be "impossible" for the panel to consider any changes the administration is seeking in the wiretap law.

The Washington Post yesterday identified 26 U.S. attorneys included on firing lists compiled from February 2005 to December 2006 by D. Kyle Sampson, then Gonzales's chief of staff, and his colleagues.

Sources yesterday identified four other current or former U.S. attorneys included on a Jan. 1 list that grouped a dozen prosecutors into three tiers. They include current U.S. Attorneys Matthew Mead of Wyoming and Eric Melgren of Kansas and former prosecutors James K. Vines of Nashville and Michael G. Heavican of Nebraska.

None responded to requests for comment yesterday. The four names did not reappear on any of Sampson's other lists, according to the sources, who are familiar with the documents, which have been withheld from the public.

The same Jan. 1 list includes U.S. Attorney Christopher J. Christie of New Jersey, who also appears on a Nov. 1 list, sources said.

Several prosecutors considered for termination said in interviews that they had received no complaints about their performance and did not know why Sampson included them. His attorney declined to comment.

U.S. Attorney Gregory Miller of Tallahassee, who appeared on three lists between February 2005 and November 2006, said he has 17 years as a career prosecutor.

"I have no idea why Kyle put me there," Miller said. "I would note that, although I am on his list, Kyle is no longer with the department and I still am."

Two U.S. attorneys placed on a Nov. 1 list said yesterday that they received apologetic telephone calls in March from the official who assembled it, Michael J. Elston, chief of staff to the deputy attorney general. On Wednesday, Christie described a similar call.

Colm F. Connolly, the chief federal prosecutor in Delaware, said Elston called "to inform me that there was an e-mail that was going to be turned over to Congress and, although it was not to be disclosed publicly, often times Congress would leak things and this could be public at some point."

Connolly said he "expressed disappointment" and asked how the e-mail was prepared. He said Elston told him "that there was this firing process in the works at the time, and he had been asked to find out whether there were any other U.S. attorneys about whom there had been concerns."

Connolly said Elston told him that he collected names by "speaking to people" but that he "could not remember who he spoke with, and he said he could not remember what the concerns were as they related to me."

In Roanoke, U.S. Attorney John L. Brownlee issued a statement saying that he received a similar call from Elston on March 14 and "reported Mr. Elston's conduct" to Justice officials in Washington.

Another prosecutor included in Elston's e-mail, Mary Beth Buchanan of Pittsburgh, expressed astonishment and pointed to her stints in Washington running both the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys and, currently, the Office on Violence Against Women.

One U.S. attorney, Frank Maxwell Wood of Macon, Ga., appeared on Elston's list shortly after his district appeared on an internal Justice Department document as having a voter-fraud problem.

Elston's attorney, Robert N. Driscoll, said in a statement yesterday that Elston assembled the list based on other officials' concerns and was not suggesting that any of those prosecutors be fired. Elston and Sampson mutually agreed that none of the five prosecutors should be removed, he said.

"To the contrary, Mike's view is that the five U.S. attorneys mentioned in the e-mail are among the department's best," Driscoll said.