ILNews

President picks prosecutor for Northern District

Michael W. Hoskins
January 1, 2009
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
The veteran federal prosecutor who's filled in three times as interim chief has been chosen for the permanent role as U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Indiana, the White House announced this morning.

David Capp, who's been a federal prosecutor for 24 years, has been the acting U.S. Attorney in the Northern District since July 2007, filling the spot after Joseph Van Bokkelen's confirmation to the District Court. Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh nominated Capp for the job from several people who'd expressed interest in it and announced the nomination late Wednesday afternoon.

"He has a well-deserved record as a tough prosecutor, leading efforts to crack down on crime and root out public corruption," Bayh said in a news release. "He has served with distinction as Interim U.S. Attorney under both Republican and Democratic administrations, and he has the respect and support of Indiana law enforcement, judges, elected officials and community leaders. His legal experience, insight, background and temperament make him an excellent candidate for this difficult and important job."

Capp has worked for the U.S Attorney's Office since 1985, serving as second-in-command since 1991 and breaking up his tenure - in 1991 and again between 1999 and 2000 - to fill in as interim chief. Since taking the temporary post two years ago, Capp has continued his predecessor's push and reiterated his dedication to prosecute corrupt politicians, the office's hallmark activity. He said corruption prosecutions will remain a priority as long as he heads the office, and he's also said drug prosecutions should make the region safer for families.

Prior to federal service, Capp was a partner at Cohen & Thiros. He is a graduate of Valparaiso University School of Law.

This nomination requires Senate confirmation and that process, which begins at the Senate Judiciary Committee, will likely start in January. Sen. Bayh's spokesman Brian Weiss said there has been no indication when a nomination may come from the White House for the Southern District of Indiana, which has had Tim Morrison serving as acting U.S. Attorney since Susan Brooks left the job in 2007.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT