Judge threatens to throw out corruption case against Ted Stevens
Evidence, which lawyers say is essential to Sen. Stevens' defense, was omitted. A hearing will be held this afternoon to consider dismissing the indictment.
WASHINGTON - The judge overseeing the corruption trial of Sen. Ted Stevens threatened today to throw out the case against the long-serving Republican after prosecutors turned up last-minute evidence defense lawyers said was exculpatory.
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, visibly angry, set a hearing for 4:30 p.m. EST today to weigh a request from Stevens' lawyers to dismiss the seven-count indictment in which Stevens is charged with failing to include more than $250,000 in gifts and home improvements in Senate financial disclosure forms.
The dispute centers on an interview between FBI agents and the government's star witness, Bill J. Allen, an Alaskan oilman who testified the last two days about how he oversaw the home renovations and gave Stevens other gifts and benefits.
The government previously turned over a redacted version of the FBI interview with Allen to defense lawyers but conceded today they had erred and that portions of the summary should not have been excised. They turned over the new evidence after discovering the oversight Wednesday night.
Defense lawyer Brendan V. Sullivan said the omitted material included statements in which Allen contradicts himself on the question of whether he believed Stevens would have paid for the home improvements if he had been billed.
The redacted material, according to Sullivan, indicates that Allen believes Stevens and his wife, Catherine, would have made such payments if they had received invoices.
Allen testified Wednesday that he did not bill Stevens for the services even though Stevens had requested an invoice on several occasions. Allen said Stevens referred him to a mutual friend about paying the bill who, according to Allen, told him that the invoice requests were a ruse and that Stevens was not interested in paying.
Federal rules require prosecutors to turn over to the defense so-called "Brady" material that is potentially exculpatory or helpful in ascertaining the credibility of witnesses. Although such disputes are relatively common in criminal trials, serious violations of the rules can lead to sanctions against the government or even dismissal of charges.
Stevens' lawyer Sullivan said the late-arriving evidence that Allen contradicted himself was serious enough to warrant dismissal.
"It is the complete opposite," Stevens' lawyer said to the judge today. "It goes to the core of the defense."
