Alaska Politics Blog : The defense case: Parts 1 through 4 -- Would you buy a car from Bill Allen?

The defense case: Parts 1 through 4 -- Would you buy a car from Bill Allen?

Posted by Alaska_Politics

Anchorage Daily News

Posted: October 31, 2007 - 2:18 pm

After the prosecution gave the first part of its closing argument, Kohring’s lawyer, John Henry Browne stood in front of jury.

“What you’re about to do will probably be one of the most important and serious things that you’ve ever done in your life,” Browne told the jurors.

The government’s argument sounds pretty persuasive Browne said. But only if you ignore the burden of proof. “If you ignore the presumption of innocence.”

One of the things buried in this case is that it’s perfectly all right for a legislator to vote I favor of things that his supporters favor.

“Halliburton gives money to the Bush camp and Halliburton expects some attention from the Bush people. That’s all legal. General motors gives money to legislators, and expects legislators to do things,” Browne said.

So do teachers unions and teamsters, he said.

Browne talked about the government must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. He pointed out that the feds started out by saying, for example, that Kohring tried to get a pickup truck from Veco. That never went anywhere, he said.

At that, a woman on the jury looked at the prosecutors.

Browne read from a sheet of notes with passages highlighted in pink.

Kohring served for years, Browne said. He was re-elected even after people knew an investigation was in the works, and people knew him as an honest man.

Browne talked about the phone call between Smith and Kohrnig, where Smith tells Kohring “don’t you dare” go crazy over the oil tax legislation.

“But according to Mr. Sullivan, they already owned him,” Browne said.

Browne asked the jury to listen to the secretly recorded FBI tapes very carefully.

“You will hear… for example … that Vic Kohring never asked for any money, ever, from Mr. Smith and Mr. Allen. He asked for a loan.”

Updated 3 p.m.
PART TWO: 'Not guilty means not proven'

No one can characterize Kohring’s conversation with Allen about a loan as a payment to Kohring, Browne told the jury. That’s fallen apart for the prosecutors, he said.

One of the prosecution’s points is that Kohring told Smith he’d lobbied or met with specific legislators.

So where are those legislators as witnesses? Browne asked.

“It is apparent to you, is it not, how much, (how) many resources the government has?” Browne asked the jury.

“Have you ever been in a (situation) where the government is going after you? Because let me tell you, there is absolutely no end to that deep pocket,“ Browne said.

One of the jurors, a man in the back, nodded.

Browne told the jury they saw FBI agents testify in this case from all over the country – Texas, California. You’ve seen the resources they have, he said.

Kohring and Browne are by themselves, he said.

“Do you not think that if Mr. Kohring lobbied legislators for Veco, the government, who has all these resources, would have them here as resources?” Browne said. “To say, ‘Yeah, Vic did come to me and was pushing this and pushing that.’”

Browne told the jurors that this was his only chance to talk to them. The prosecution would get the last word – and that’s because the burden of proof is such a high hurdle.

That’s for a reason, he said.

“I am waving the flag a little bit. … There are 18- and 19-year-old kids dying today in support of these principles.”

Browne took out the first of a few visual aids he’d brought into court: A white placard with black writing on it. He put it on a stand for the jury to see what it said:

“Not guilty means not proven. “

By finding Kohring “not guilty,” the jury wouldn’t necessarily be saying “he’s as pure as the driven snow,” Browne said.

“Not guilty means not proven,” he repeated.

“That these people with all of their resources” … Brown gestured to the prosecutors …”And the resources of the United States of America, have not proven their case.”

Updated 3:35 p.m.
PART THREE: Central casting for a ‘sleazy lobbyist’

“What this case is not about is prejudice about politicians,” Browne told the jury.

There must be more politician jokes than lawyer jokes these days, he said.

This case is not about the legislature’s internal ethics rules and regulations, Browne said.

“This case is not about legitimate contributions and fundraisers.”

“This case is not about assuming that a gift is a bribe … without an agreement to do something illegal."

How did we get here? Browne asked.

It all began with a lobbyist, Frank Prewitt, he said. “He was in trouble with the law, but wouldn’t admit it ...”

Browne took a drink of water.

The government started hearing names of politicians, Browne said. “When the names came out, the FBI started drooling. The names they heard were Ted Stevens. The names they heard were Ben Stevens. The names they heard were Don Young…”

One name was Kohring, he said, talking about how the government made a mistake in Kohring’s case.

Today, it seems it’s common for the government to not admit its mistakes, Browne told the jury.

He said the prosecution didn’t actually know how Kohring voted on PPT before the trial. The prosecution claims Kohring got a payment when in fact he asked for a loan, Browne said.

As for the charge that the job Kohring’s nephew got with Veco amounted to a bribe – that’s ridiculous, Browne said. “Their case is so weak, they turn to that as a basis for a bribe.”

Browne accused the prosecutors of adding new charges because their case was failing – charges such as the complaint about Kohring firing Musser and staying out of Sen. Lyda Green’s race (he called her “Lyla”) at Allen’s request.

Browne said he’s not faulting the government for its corruption investigations, but he looked to draw a clear line between his client and the other politicians.

He talked about Ted Stevens and $400,000 from Veco. (I’ll get to this in the prosecution’s final statements, but they say that number never came up in trial. I'm trying to stick to one side's case at a time.)

Ben Stevens was paid $250,000 in consulting contracts, Browne said. Anderson got $20,000 and a consulting job.

Browne pointed out that he asked Allen if the work on Stevens house was a gift. Allen said it wasn’t.

In contrast, Browne said, the amount of money in Kohring’s case is “less than it would cost you and I to buy a plasma TV set.”

As Browne talked about other public officials, one of prosecutors stood and objected. The judge said something about Browne being “close to the line.”

The defense lawyer returned his focus to Frank Prewitt – the corrections consultant/lobbyist who jurors saw talking to Kohring on a secret tape earlier in the week.

“Mr. Prewitt is central casting for a lobbyist. A sleazy lobbyist, frankly,” Browne told the jury.

He said the government used Prewitt to try and entrap Kohring, and that while Kohring didn't look good eating on camera, he doesn’t hang himself the way the investigators wanted.

The only corroborated evidence of Kohring getting money in the case is the Easter egg money, he said.

Browne said: “If you’re going to believe everything that Mr. Sullivan just said. You have to rely on Bill Allen’s word.”

Updated 4:25 p.m.
PART FOUR: Bill Allen's word

After telling the jury that to believe the prosecutors, they have to believe Bill Allen, Browne brought out another visual aid.

This was an excerpt of jury instructions. Browne said the instructions talk about witnesses. I took his message to the jury to be: Take what a witness has to say with a grain of salt if that witness was a deal that could get them a lighter sentence for cooperating.

Browne told the jury that the fact Allen pleaded guilty means nothing as far as Kohring is concerned, and: “Examine Bill Allen’s testimony with greater caution (than) that of other witnesses.”

Browne referenced all the profanity the jury heard on the tapes. “True character is how you act when nobody is watching. Mr. Allen told you that if he knew he was being taped, he wouldn’t have used all those bad words and he wouldn’t have said all those things.”

Browne said: Allen’s demeanor on the stand was self-serving and “pathetic,” and he seemed to want sympathy for only selling Veco for $400 million. “He has memory problems. He has a brain injury. He obviously drinks too much.”

At one point, Browne called Allen: “blasphemous,” “rude,” arrogant,” “grandoise,” and intoxicated and obsessed with power. Making $1 billion a year apparently wasn’t enough for the Veco chief, he said.

Later in his closing argument, Browne said Allen couldn’t describe the conspiracy he’d pleaded guilty too. Browne, quoted Allen, imitating in a drawl: “I just sign what the laywers put in from of me …"

Browne talked about the possibility of Allen’s children being charged if Allen doesn’t cooperate

“Would you, and I’ll pause for dramatic effect, would you make a critical decision in your life based on Bill Allen’s testimony?” Browne asked.

Would you even buy a car from Bill Allen? he asked.

Toward the end of his remarks, Browne seemed to re-assure the jury that it’s OK for them to find Kohring not guilty.

“We know innocent people are arrested every day. And we know that juries find people not guilty every day.”

“Maybe that will disappoint the prosecutors, and maybe that will disappoint the press,” Browne gestured to gallery, “But you cannot disappoint yourselves.”

He asked the jury to use common sense and think about how many times Kohring said on the tapes that he didn’t want a “freebie.

“Do you hear Ted Stevens saying that? Do you hear Ben Stevens saying that?” he asked.

This drew an objection.

“Contain, Mr. Browne,” said the judge.

Browne talked about the various exhibits, pointing out where Kohring said he wants to keep things legitimate, saying that he’s coming to Allen as a friend.

He told the jury that in this case, the government ran into two 6’6” obstacles – a defendant who wouldn’t roll over and “who believes in this system and who believes you’ll do the right thing,” and a lawyer who believes the government has “sadly failed” to prove their case.

Browne talked about the Easter egg money, saying Allen told him to put the money in the eggs. Browne imitated Allen, slurring his words: “This is what I want you to do.”

Before he finished, Browne took out one last placard and placed it in front of the jury.

“Be your word,” it said.

You promised to hold the government to its standard and its burden of proof, he said.

“You promised us you’d do these things, and I’m asking you to do that. Be your word. Thank you.”

Alaska Politics Blog

Contributors

Features

Archive

The defense case: Parts 1 through 4 -- Would you buy a car from Bill Allen?

Comments