Another agent, Daniel McLaughlin, denied that he had ever considered the incident to be an assault. After Howards' arrest, he said, he and another agent, Adam Daniels, wrote statements describing what they had seen -- physical contact but no assault.
McLaughlin said Reichle called him several hours after the arrest and asked him to alter his written statement.
"[Reichle] said, 'I need you to change your statement; your story and mine are not the same.' I said, 'My statement is what I recollect from what I participated in. We're not having this conversation.' Then I hung up on him," McLaughlin testified.
The next morning, McLaughlin said Reichle confronted him and said, " 'The vice president's detail is involved in a cover-up.' I thought that he had taken a giant leap away from his good senses."
A Secret Service spokesman declined to comment on the case because of the litigation.
The agents' rancorous difference of opinion makes Cheney a crucial witness in the case, the attorney for Howards argued.
He said it was customary for lawyers to accept subpoenas on behalf of their clients, but Cheney's attorney, James Gilligan, had refused to do so.
Gilligan noted that the agents and other government employees had complied with depositions. Asking the vice president, he said, "is a different kettle of fish."
To compel the testimony of a high-level official, the plaintiff must show the testimony can't be gleaned from other sources, Gilligan said.
Magistrate Judge Craig Shaffer ordered Gilligan to present his legal arguments by the end of February outlining why Cheney should not be subpoenaed. Another hearing is scheduled for March 6.
--
deedee.correll@latimes.com
