Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 23, 2017, 02:35:23 PM
75132 Posts in 1768 Topics by 359 Members
Latest Member: nic4real
Home Help Login Register
TalkLeft Discussion Forums  |  Topics  |  Crimes 'R Us: Crimes in the News  |  Current Cases  |  Stevens Witness Recants. 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Stevens Witness Recants.  (Read 3169 times)
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Stevens Witness Recants.
« on: November 21, 2008, 05:31:22 PM »

Nov 21 03:44 PM US/EST         
  WASHINGTON (AP) - One of the government's witnesses against convicted Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska now says he wasn't truthful on the stand.
David Anderson, who worked on Stevens' house for VECO founder Bill Allen, testified during the trial that there was no agreement with the Justice Department for immunity for him, his family or friends in exchange for his testimony.

Anderson now says he did have an understanding with the Justice Department. This came out Friday in a letter Anderson wrote to U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan.

Stevens' lawyers want a hearing on Anderson's allegations. The Justice Department had no immediate comment.

Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Stevens Witness Recants.
« Reply #1 on: December 15, 2008, 01:41:53 PM »

   A hearing on this was set on this for December 1st but was postponed by the judge at the last
minute for reasons which were not stated in the accounts most immediately available.No new date seems to have been set.
  The government alleges that  they have documents and videos to disprove the recantation.
     Here is a by hand delivery from the Senator's lawyers to the Attorney General:
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Stevens Witness Recants.
« Reply #2 on: December 22, 2008, 12:11:57 PM »

  The Plot(and it may all yet prove to be  a Plot) thickens!

Whistle-blower adds twist to Stevens case
WHISTLE-BLOWER: Federal employee accuses government of misconduct.


(12/20/08 20:42:54)
A whistle-blower inside the Justice Department has accused members of the team investigating public corruption in Alaska of official misconduct, according to the judge who presided over Sen. Ted Stevens' trial in Washington, D.C.

The whistle-blower's complaint, dated Dec. 2, is now the subject of an internal investigation by the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility, according to a memorandum and order signed Friday by U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan of the District of Columbia.

Sullivan revealed the existence of the complaint, and three secret hearings about it last week, in his 29-page order.

Sullivan said little about the nature of the alleged misconduct. Among the allegations was that a government employee accepted "multiple things of value" from sources cooperating in the investigation, Sullivan said.

The judge also reported that the whistle-blower accused at least two federal employees of intentionally violating government policies in the corruption investigation in Alaska and in connection with material that was supposed to be provided to Stevens for his defense, Sullivan said.

Stevens was found guilty Oct. 27 of seven felony counts of failing to report gifts and services on his annual Senate disclosures.

Sullivan said it was premature to say whether the allegations, if true, could have affected the outcome of the trial. But Sullivan said the allegations were clearly relevant to the Stevens case.

Stevens is asking for a new trial, arguing that his case was tainted by government misconduct, among other issues. The motion will be heard by Sullivan in February.

The whistle-blower is a federal employee "with extensive knowledge of the investigation and trial in this case," Sullivan said. The whistle-blower and the people named in the complaint "are not strangers to these proceedings, but rather were significantly involved in the investigation and prosecution of the defendant."

His order advised lawyers representing the Justice Department, Stevens and the whistle-blower that he intended to make public a redacted version of the complaint Monday at 4 p.m. Eastern Standard Time -- noon in Alaska.

The public version of the document will not reveal the names of the complainant or the subjects of the internal investigation, Sullivan said, but will otherwise disclose the allegations.

Prosecutors had sought to keep the complaint secret since informing the judge of its existence Dec. 11. Sullivan, in his order Friday, soundly rejected that effort, citing the constitutional rights of Stevens to a fair trial and the public to observe the administration of justice. But he acknowledged that the whistle-blower and the officials cited in the complaint had privacy rights, at least in the current stages of the internal investigation.


Stevens' lawyers, who complained throughout the month-long trial of prosecutorial misconduct, had sought full public disclosure of the document, Sullivan said. The whistle-blower, concerned about the consequences of being exposed, joined with the government in seeking to keep it secret, he said.

The complaint is the second time the Office of Professional Responsibility, which investigates misconduct by Justice Department attorneys and law enforcement personnel, has gotten involved in the Stevens case.

In mid-trial, lead prosecutor Brenda Morris told Sullivan that she and the other members of her team had self-reported that they had failed to turn over material to the defense as required by law.

The material involved FBI agent notes of interviews with the government's chief witness, Bill Allen, the former chief executive of Veco Corp.

At the time, Sullivan said he thought the government was intentionally hiding information and ordered prosecutors to sweep through their files and give everything connected to Stevens to the defense.

With the jury gone from the courtroom Oct. 2, Morris acknowledged the government committed "a gross error" in withholding the material, but denied any intentional misbehavior.


From the onset, the government sought to keep the latest problem secret, Sullivan said. When it alerted the court to the complaint Dec. 11, it did so in a sealed memorandum, he said.

Prosecutors asserted the complaint bore "no relationship whatsoever" to the Stevens case.

"The court flatly rejects the government's position," Sullivan wrote. The complaint alleged a person involved in the investigation accepted "multiple things of value," including "artwork and employment for a relative" from cooperating sources, the judge noted with some irony.

"Surely the court does not need to remind the government that the defendant in this case was convicted for failing to disclose that he had accepted multiple things of value and, in fact, the trial included testimony about his receipt of artwork and employment for a relative," Sullivan wrote.

During one of the secret hearings last week, Sullivan said, he was unable to get any kind of answer from a government lawyer to repeated questions about whether the complaint contained favorable information that needed to be disclosed to Stevens. The lawyer's refusal to answer "blinks at reality," Sullivan wrote.

In his order, Sullivan cited a long history of court decisions supporting the public's right to know about government conduct.

"To seal the complaint would be to deprive the public of information that directly addresses courtroom conduct, documents that were introduced at trial, and information that was relied upon by the court for various decisions throughout the proceedings," Sullivan said. "To say that the public's interest in this case was and is significant would be an understatement. In fact, even post-trial, the media has an interest in the case," he said, citing recent reports in the Anchorage Daily News and the Washington Post.

But Sullivan acknowledged the complainant also needed protection, referring to a case involving the Alyeska Pipeline Service Co., where a number of whistle-blowers were subject to reprisals in the 1980s and 1990s.

At the secret hearing Friday, the lawyer representing the whistle-blower "argued that the complainant would not have filed the complaint, at least in the form it was filed, had the complainant known that it might be made public."

But whistle-blower rights don't trump those of Stevens or the public, Sullivan said. Hiding the identities in the document is adequate protection, he said.

Find Richard Mauer online at adn.com/contact/rmauer or call 257-4345.

Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Stevens Witness Recants.
« Reply #3 on: December 23, 2008, 01:50:06 PM »

   Here is  the Orfer:
     This is a slow loader but footnote three is worth the wait.
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Stevens Witness Recants.
« Reply #4 on: December 23, 2008, 06:45:17 PM »


  Witness in Alaska Sen. Stevens’ trial regrets testifying
Jesse J. Holland/The Associated Press

Published Tuesday, December 23, 2008

 WASHINGTON — A witness in convicted Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens’ corruption trial has told the judge he never would have testified if he’d known he did not have immunity from prosecution.

“I would like to be perfectly clear ... I would have pleaded the Fifth,” welder David Anderson said in a Dec. 15 letter to U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan. Anderson was referring to his Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination.

The letter was made public Tuesday in papers from Stevens’ lawyers, who have asked Sullivan to hold a hearing on Anderson’s charges and to let them investigate. It was unclear when Sullivan would rule.

Anderson says he thought he had an immunity agreement with the Justice Department, even though he testified during the trial that he did not have such a deal. The Justice Department previously has said the government never made any agreement of immunity with Anderson or for any of his family or friends.

Department spokeswoman Laura Sweeney declined further comment Tuesday.

Stevens, 85 and the Senate’s longest-serving Republican, was convicted in late October on seven felony counts of lying on Senate financial disclosure forms to hide hundreds of thousands of dollars in gifts and home renovations from millionaire businessman and VECO Corp. founder Bill Allen, who is Anderson’s uncle.

The senator, who is scheduled to be sentenced next year, has said he will appeal. He lost his Senate seat to Democrat Mark Begich in the November election.

Anderson’s allegation is the latest against the Justice Department since Stevens’ conviction.

An FBI agent, in a heavily redacted letter released Monday, complained about some of the department’s tactics during the trial, including not turning over evidence to the defense and an “inappropriate relationship” between a government representative and the prosecution’s star witness.

Stevens’ lawyers on Monday asked Sullivan to throw out the conviction or order a new trial because of the allegations. Sullivan has not yet responded to their request.

Anderson supervised the start of the 2000 renovation of Stevens’ Girdwood, Alaska, home and later responded to maintenance requests by Stevens and his wife. Anderson complained in an earlier letter to the judge that he thought he had an immunity agreement with the Justice Department for himself, his family and friends.

“I discuss the fact that I would have pleaded the Fifth had I have known that an agreement had not been made for immunity,” Anderson said in the most recent letter. “I would like to be perfectly clear ... I would have pleaded the Fifth.”

Anderson also told Sullivan that he had told an Alaska reporter about the immunity deal, and accused the government of trying to cover up a plot by Allen to have him killed.

Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Stevens Witness Recants.
« Reply #5 on: December 30, 2008, 01:22:50 PM »

 Here is the link (much redacted) to the FBI Whistle Blowers Complaint:
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Stevens Witness Recants.
« Reply #6 on: February 13, 2009, 06:22:48 PM »

   Federal prosecutors have found a new reason to apologize over misleading information they've provided to the judge in former Sen. Ted Stevens' trial, and this time Stevens' lawyers are saying the government should be held in contempt.

In a letter to the judge dated Jan. 30 and made public Thursday, William Welch, head of the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section, said he erred when he said in January that government employees cited in an FBI agent's complaint alleging improprieties by government officials "want their story to be made public."

In fact, he wrote, not all of them gave their consent to having their names released Jan. 14 in a publicly filed copy of the eight-page complaint, though he didn't identify which ones.

In the complaint, agent Chad Joy accused a fellow agent and prosecutors of violating FBI policy and fair-trial rules in the wide-ranging public corruption investigation in Alaska and in Stevens' trial last year.

The new apology comes on top of a series of errors and misstatements made by prosecutors in connection with the complaint and other issues that arose during and after Stevens' trial.

In fact, Welch started his letter with an apology for an earlier "misunderstanding and misuse" of the phrase "whistle-blower" in connection with Joy's complaint -- and that was before he even revealed the newest misstatement.

How serious are the government's current problems? U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan hasn't expressed an opinion beyond obvious annoyance.

The basic facts of the case remain largely unassailed: that Stevens got tens of thousands of dollars' worth of gifts and services, primarily from the oil field service company Veco Corp. and its chief executive Bill Allen, didn't report them, then schemed to cover up his omissions.

But in a new motion filed Thursday on the collateral issues, Stevens' lawyers cited the latest material from prosecutors as additional grounds for their demand that Stevens' charges be dismissed over government misconduct, or that he at least get a new trial. And they added a new wrinkle: a request to Sullivan that the government be held in contempt.

"The government still does not get it. Over and over again, it has been caught red-handed making false representations to the Court and the defense," defense attorney Robert Cary said in his motion, filed publicly Thursday after initially having been submitted under seal Monday.

Not only did the government admit another error, Cary said, but it failed to comply with Sullivan's order of Jan. 21 to produce every communication in its files about Joy's complaint and to share that material with the defense.


In the court documents put on the record Thursday, prosecutors acknowledged they weren't complying with the literal words of Sullivan's order but said they thought "other, more specific statements" by Sullivan required only a disclosure of communications related to whether Joy was a protected government whistle-blower.

That issue has been a subplot in the ever-growing post-trial din. Initially, when prosecutors sought to keep the complaint secret, they said he was a protected whistle-blower. When they sought to make the complaint public, they said he wasn't.

"The Government deeply regrets that the proceedings surrounding the Joy Complaint have escalated to this stage," said the most recent filing.

In explaining the shifting positions, prosecutors say now that the complaint was the sort that could lead to protection. But since Joy hasn't alleged any reprisals, he doesn't fall within the law that protects whistle-blowers, they said.

If the judge wants a larger disclosure or if he demands that sensitive attorney work-product documents be shared with the defense, the prosecutors asked they be given a two-week stay so they could decide whether to appeal.

In a new order docketed this week, Sullivan said he wasn't ready to determine whether the government filing conformed to his order. But he didn't seem very willing to give prosecutors more time.

"Moreover, for the reasons already stated by the Court in previous Orders and because much of the recent litigation is in response to the government's requests for relief and admitted misrepresentations, intentional or not, the Court will review further requests for extensions of time with disfavor," Sullivan wrote.


Stevens' trial concluded Oct. 27. Even before the verdict, prosecutors got into trouble with the judge for not turning over evidence to the defense and for producing an inflated accounting of free work done for Stevens by Veco. Sullivan imposed sanctions on the government, stripping it of a small part of its case, but the jury appeared to have found more than ample evidence to convict Stevens on all seven disclosure counts.

Since then, Stevens' attorneys have taken two main approaches. They have said an accumulation of errors by the judge in interpreting the law and by the prosecution in its handling of the case should be sufficient for Stevens to get a new trial. And they've argued that government misconduct was so extreme that the judge should dismiss the case entirely. Now the latest filing adds a contempt citation to Stevens' proposed remedies.

"The government's excuse for this umpteenth alleged misunderstanding makes absolutely no sense," Cary said.

Prosecutors have acknowledged making mistakes but they said none were deliberate.

Joy's complaint, filed with the Justice Department in late November, has fueled the defense's post-trial effort, and Stevens' lawyers are demanding a full accounting in open court -- especially assertions by Joy that the government deliberately hid evidence favorable to Stevens.

Welch's letter also gives some insight about the internal fallout of Joy's complaint when a heavily edited version became public in December. It had a "negative impact" in the Anchorage FBI office, he said.

Many of Joy's complaints were against his co-case agent, Mary Beth Kepner, the lead agent in the corruption investigation.

"Special Agent Kepner has expressed her desire to have her name public and more importantly to release any and all information related to the allegations against her," Welch said.

During the first week in January, FBI agents from Washington, D.C., interviewed personnel in Anchorage, Welch said. The Washington agents told the interviewees that their statements eventually would be submitted publicly in court. But some Alaska personnel complained they didn't consent to their names being used in the Joy complaint when a less-edited version was refiled publicly Jan. 14 with the names of all government officials exposed, Welch said.


Judge holds Stevens prosecutors in contempt
  updated 3:38 p.m.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge held Justice Department attorneys in contempt Friday for failing to deliver documents to former Sen. Ted Stevens' legal team.

U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said it was "outrageous" that government attorneys would ignore his deadline for turning over documents.

Last month, Sullivan ordered the Justice Department to turn over all the agency's internal communications regarding a whistleblower complaint against the FBI agent leading the investigation into the former Alaska senator.

The agent, Chad Joy, bitterly complained about some Justice Department tactics during the trial, including not turning over evidence and an "inappropriate relationship" between another agent working the case and the prosecutor's star witness.

Stevens was convicted in October of lying on Senate disclosure documents about hundreds of thousands of dollars in gifts and home renovations from an Alaska businessman. In November, Stevens lost his bid for re-election to the Senate seat he had held since 1968.

Stevens and his lawyers complained during the trial about prosecutors withholding information. In December, they asked for his conviction to be tossed out. As part of their request, they asked for the documents related to Joy.

During Friday's hearing, Sullivan repeatedly asked three Justice Department attorneys sitting at the prosecution's table whether they had some reason not to turn over the documents. They finally acknowledged they did not, and Sullivan exploded into anger.

"That was a court order," he bellowed. "That wasn't a request. I didn't ask for them out of the kindness of your hearts. ... Isn't the Department of Justice taking court orders seriously these days?"

He said he didn't want to get "sidetracked" by deciding a sanction immediately and would deal with their punishment later. But he ordered them to produce the material by the end of the day.

"That's outrageous for the Department of Justice - the largest law firm on the planet," he said. "That is not acceptable in this court."

Sullivan held all three attorneys sitting at the table in contempt and demanded repeatedly to know who else was involved in withholding the information. Another government attorney sitting in the back of the courtroom stood up and gave her name.

    Thanks to Clowns
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Advertise Here