newsminer.com

Normal notions about the perils of pretrial publicity are reversed in the legal struggle over whether Sen. Ted Stevens will go to trial in Washington, D.C., or Alaska.

The defense is hoping that a half-century and more of pretrial publicity would work in Stevens’ favor and lead to a more sympathetic jury with a trial in Alaska.

The Department of Justice prefers to present the case to a Washington, D.C., jury that can consider the evidence independent of his pivotal role in Alaska political life since statehood.

The latest round of court papers filed this week has increased the stakes for Stevens and created daunting new political and legal challenges for the 40-year incumbent.

In addition to the previous charges about improvements to the Girdwood house performed by Bill Allen and VECO that were not acknowledged in Senate disclosure forms, the government unloaded on Stevens several new claims Thursday.

In the pre-trial battle of the lawyers, the government charges followed paperwork filed by Stevens’ legal team in which they said the case against him is an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers doctrine.

Stevens’ side argued that the Senate Ethics Committee should deal with allegations of misconduct regarding Senate disclosure forms, not the federal courts. U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan has set a hearing for next Wednesday on the transfer issue, and the case is scheduled to go to trial in a little more than a month.

The legal case and its attendant arguments are complicated enough. The political implications are harder to gauge and more volatile, but nothing filed in court this week will work to Stevens’ advantage in his election campaign.

He is likely to win the primary election and to face a steady stream of publicity in the weeks to come that consists of accusations and denials, hardly the ideal environment for a successful political race.

Lawyers for Stevens say the trial should be in Alaska so he can participate in his campaign and talk to voters at nights and on weekends. Lawyers for the government said if the trial is here, Stevens would be campaigning during the trial, and the jury would have to be sequestered. That would mean no access to family, friends, TV, radio and newspapers.

This would limit the ability of jurors to “participate in the electoral process in advance of the November 2008 general election,” the government said.

In their latest filings, the prosecutors said Stevens did not disclose a $5,000 investment in Florida real estate in 2001 that produced a $100,000 gross profit in six months; a generator that Stevens asked Allen to buy and hook up to his Girdwood house to prepare for the possibility of a worldwide computer crash on Jan. 1, 2000; a 2005 Jeep Cherokee that Allen arranged to acquire for Stevens’ youngest daughter in a trade with a discount of about $13,000; how Allen gave one of the senator’s sons a job in 2006 at Stevens’ request and gave the son a personal loan; that Allen agreed, at Stevens’ request, to give a job and technical training to one of the senator’s grandsons and that VECO paid tuition and room and board at a training institute for the grandson totaling $10,876.

Finally, the prosecutors claim that e-mails sent by Stevens to a personal friend, identified only as “Person A,” demonstrate “Stevens’ consciousness of guilt concerning the conduct charged in the indictment.”

The e-mails quoted by the government include one sent Sept. 1, 2006, the day after the FBI served about two dozen search warrants in Juneau, Wasilla, Willow, Anchorage, Eagle River and Girdwood. This was almost a year before the FBI conducted the day-long search of Stevens’ Girdwood home on July 30, 2007.

In 2006, the FBI would not disclose the reason for the two dozen search warrants, but news reports quoted witnesses as saying the investigation probably dealt with the relationship of Alaska state legislators to VECO.

The Anchorage Daily News mentioned that a search warrant was served in Girdwood, but there were no details on what building was targeted, and Stevens was not mentioned in any of the news stories.

The government claims Stevens sent two e-mails that day to Person A.

The Anchorage Daily News reported Friday that Person A appears to be Bob Persons of Girdwood, owner of the Double Musky restaurant.

The first e-mail to Person A was sent at 3:49 a.m. and refers to a news release sent that morning about the warrants. Stevens wrote, “press releases say the FBI served a warrant in Girdwood??? Did they hit our house? T.”

In the second note, sent at 5:33 p.m. that day, Stevens wrote, “Have you been by the Chalet? Teds.”

To further back up its claims about the “consciousness of guilt,” the government claims that the following year, on May 17, Stevens sent Person A two e-mails after learning that Person A had been ordered to testify to a Washington, D.C., grand jury.

“I hope we can work something out to make sure you aren’t led astray on this occasion,” Stevens said in the first, while in the second he said, “don’t answer questions you don’t KNOW the answers to.”

The defense will argue that the e-mails sent on Sept. 1, 2006, do not show “consciousness of guilt,” but a reasonable response to news that a search warrant had been served in Girdwood and that VECO was involved.

Look for Stevens’ lawyers to attempt to prevent the prosecution from entering evidence into the record about the incidents listed in the document filed Thursday.

In addition to raising several arguments for dismissal of the indictment, Stevens’ lawyers also called for release of a “bill of particulars,” specifying the accusations against him.

The documents filed Thursday reveal that the prosecutors hope testimony at the trial, if allowed by the judge, will range far beyond the cost of improvements to the Girdwood home.