With TV deadlines and responsibilities today I did not have time to get a blog out. So here's a look at ADN's Kyle Hopkins:
The feds' case: Parts 1 through 4 -- When Allen says jump ...
Posted: October 31, 2007 - 12:03 pm
From Kyle Hopkins at the federal courthouse –
Closing arguments in the Kohring case began with prosecutor Edward Sullivan. (Prosecutors go first and last, because they have the burden of proof, the judge told the jury.)
“There’s an old saying: To whom much has been entrusted, even more will be demanded,” Sullivan told the jurors in front of a crowded courtroom.
Legislators of Alaska are entrusted with representing the values and interests of the voters who elect them, he said, and in return voters demand that lawmakers not misuse their office for personal gain.
Sullivan told the jury that Kohring broke that trust. “He sold his oath in his office …”
He told the jury that the evidence in the case proves beyond a reasonable doubt that: “Vic Kohring has done the bidding of Veco. … That Vic Kohring has lined his own pockets and that Vic Kohring is guilty.”
(Note; I’m going to interrupt myself here. It is surreal blogging from the federal building cafeteria today, with all these federal employees walking around wearing viking helmets, pirate scarves and butterfly wings.)
Sullivan told the jury there are four critical points for them to consider:
1. In Veco’s view, the pipeline – apparently he was referring to the gas pipeline – “was the goose that laid the golden egg.” It was a huge part of Veco’s future, with hundreds of millions of dollars on the line.
2. To get the pipeline, there was a belief that the governor’s 20/20 oil tax plan had to pass.
3. Veco supported that 20/20 tax plan because that’s what Veco’s clients -- BP, Conoco, Exxon – had agreed to. “If Veco wanted those future contracts, it had to keep their clients happy.” Veco had to produce, Sullivan said.
4. Veco execs Bill Allen and Rick Smith went to Juneau to advocate for the 20/20 tax, and used several key legislators to do that. Sullivan said Kohring was one of those legislators …
PART TWO: Updated 12:25 p.m.
'They're like a married couple, Smith and Allen.'
Sullivan said that in 2006, the Veco execs were worried that because the oil tax legislation wasn’t going to Kohring’s committee, Kohring might get upset.
He said the jury had already heard evidence of what Kohring can do when upset – a reference to the testimony about SB 185, which Kohring was accused of holding.
Allen and Smith had to get Kohring to support the 20/20 plan, Sullivan said. The jury heard that Kohring is very anti-tax, and they don’t want him doing anything to stall the bill. (Try and lower the tax, for example, even though the oil companies had already agreed to it.)
“They’re worried about other legislators being too high, they’re worried about this guy being too low,” Sullivan said.
Sullivan and, later, prosecutor Joe Bottini, often referred Kohring as “this guy” throughout their closing arguments.
Sullivan played a tape of Smith talking to Kohring on the phone, where Smith says he doesn’t want Kohring to go “crazy” or “wacko” over the tax bill. The jury heard Kohring say he understands that there’s a lot of give and take in politics and “I don’t want to screw you guys, that’s for sure.” (You can hear all the FBI recordings here. The one he's talking about is Feb. 21.)
What’s key here is that Sullivan is trying to show that Kohring was in Veco’s pocket when it came to the oil tax – that he’d vote the way Veco wanted. Just how the votes went has been a confusing point for both sides.
Looking to interpret the recording, Sullivan says Kohring is reassuring Smith that he wouldn’t screw his No. 1 financial supporter.
That call was on Feb. 21, 2006. Also in that call, Kohring and Smith talk about setting up a meeting on Feb. 23, Sullivan said.
That’s the pub meeting, where Allen told the jury that he gave Kohring $1,000. And that Smith left because he “sensed” money was going to change hands.
How did Smith sense that?
“They’re like a married couple Smith and Allen. He knows what Allen is gong to do. He knows that Allen has given Kohring cash payments in the past.”
Next, Sullivan played the March 4 video of Smith and Allen sitting in room 604. He pointed out the two men didn’t know they were being recorded, and the jury watched a short clip.
The courtroom audio system buzzed, making it harder to hear than usual. The tape showed Allen saying he gave had given Kohring $1,000, and Smith shouting “I know!” and saying that’s why he had left them alone.
This also the clip where Allen says Kohring would “kiss our ass.”
Allen didn’t tell Smith he gave Kohring $1,000 because he wanted to give him a gift, or because they were close friends, Sullivan told the jury.
“He gave $1,000 so he would 'kiss our ass'? Is there anything else I need to say about the relationship between Veco and Vic Kohring?” Sullivan asked.
Sullivan wore a dark suit. In fact, everyone is wore dark suits today: Kohring, his lawyer, and both prosecutors.
As I write this, a guy in a floppy green hat and clanking armor walked by with his cafeteria tray.
Updated 1:10 p.m.
PART THREE: No shared love of Russian women
Lets talk a little about the relationship between Kohring and Bill Allen, Sullivan told the jury.
They weren’t best friends, he said.
There was no deep bond over a love of Russian women, he said. (Kohring’s wife is Russian. So was a girlfriend of Allen’s.)
Remember the “Red Carpet List,” Sullivan asked the jurors? Smith and Allen were listed under “supporters” not “friends.”
He said Allen gave Kohring money to keep him loyal, keep him on the team, and support the 20/20 oil tax.
All Kohring brought was his legislative hat, Sullivan said. “He’s not shy about putting it out, asking them for money.”
Sullivan accused Kohring of milking lobbyists and trying to get free meals.
Kohring was always pleading poverty to Allen, knowing Allen had deep pockets, the prosecutor said. “This guy was making nearly $100,000, but wasn’t telling Allen that. Korhing can’t tell him that, because that’s going to stop the money train”
Sullivan said Allen and Smith had a secret. The prosecutor walked closer to the jurors, talking to them in a stage whisper: “This guy” who never voted for a tax was going to support the 20/20 plan.
Sullivan talked about how it was always Kohring who called Smith – not the other way around – with Kohring saying he’d lobby colleagues and advocate good things for Veco.
He reminded the jury that Allen said he took money out of his wallet and put it in his front pocket in anticipation of the March 30th sit-down with Kohring, so Allen could hand the money to Kohring more quickly.
Sullivan focused on the March 30th tape. That’s the tape where Kohring talks about his $17,000 debt, and talks about getting a loan or work from Veco. It’s the meeting where Kohring and Allen discuss Easter eggs for Kohring’s daughter, and Allen hands Kohring some cash.
“Lets be real here, he’s going to Bill Allen because Bill Allen is his No. 1 financial supporter… he’s hoping that Bill Allen will give him the $17,000 dollars.”
Moments later, the courtroom darkened and the jury saw a freeze frame of Allen handing the money and Kohring smiling.
“That is not a gift, that’ s a payoff. That’s a bribe.”
Where’s Kohring’s gift disclosure form for the cash, if the money is a gift? Sullivan asked.
Updated 1:40 p.m.
PART FOUR: How high?
Sullivan looked to show the jury that after talking about a loan and getting some cash, Kohring starts talking about lobbying his colleagues on Veco’s behalf.
The jury listed Kohring, on tape, tell Smith he was following up by taking meetings and talking to people about the oil tax.
“Kohring at this point, is working for Veco," Sullivan said.
Next, Sullivan turned to the “hamburger tape” – the June meeting where Allen was thinking of having Kohring skip a vote to derail the oil tax legislation. The Veco execs decide not to do that, but Sullivan looked to show Kohring would have.
“At this point folks, if Allen had told Kohring to jump, he would have said how high.”
As for Kohring’s nephew, Sullivan said he seems like a nice kid, but he got his job because of who he is.
He showed the jury the fax from Smith the other Veco execs, saying Kohring’s nephew was “a winner” for their intership program. Smith and the nephew hadn’t met at that point, he said.
As for the charge that Allen leaned on Kohring to get former Kohring aide Eric Musser to drop an APOC complaint: “The complaint doesn’t go away, but Eric Musser does, shortly thereafter.”
Sullivan talked about the different charges against Kohring, and summarized what the feds say Kohring received from Veco:
- $1,000 at the Douglas pub.
- Money from Allen, given near McDonalds, the night of the “hamburger tape.”
- Money in room 604 on March 30.
- A roughly $3,000 summer job for his nephew.
“I ask you on behalf of the United States to find the defendant in this case, Vic Kohring, guilty of all four (charges),” Sullivan said.
Next: The defendant’s case.
The defense case: Parts 1 through 4 -- Would you buy a car from Bill Allen?
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.”
I couldn't have kept a stright face.
“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.
OK, I am hooked on this trial, but when it's over there will be at least two more. Linehan's trial was off the website in a week, just like this will be. I know it's important to Vic-- but is this the most important thing they will do? Even in the top ten? Give birth, buy homes, see a child's dance recital, a hockey tournament, get married, make a decision to get a divorce (Browne knows about that,) decide to study extra hard for a college class and get accepted into a special master's program at Cornell (or obsess over this-- never mind.) Browne must think people have lame lives to think what they decide on a jury is one of the most important and most serious yadda-yadda-yadda. What they decide is one of the most important to Vic. He should be thanking them from the bottom of his heart for taking time out from their lives to be there for his client and really impress how important it is to Vic. Plead about Vic being dedicated to his non-existant wife. His step daughter-- his pet rock!
Browne, I wish I was able to talk to you and I would laugh in your pretentious face. This trial will be over in a matter of days and "the most important thpttttt" will be a distant memory within a week. No matter what the outcome, the jurors will go to their boring lives and have. . . frankly, more exciting, more important and more serious things to consider.
If a juror bursts out laughing at high drama, do they get axed or can they stay? I think I'd still make a solid, unbiased decision, but I think I'd fall over laughing at this.
Bottini's closings ...
Posted: October 31, 2007 - 6:26 pm
From Kyle Hopkins in Anchorage --
OK, here's the last of todays' closing arguments in the Kohring trial.
Prosecutor Joe Bottini started the final round of closing arguments today looking to deliver a counterpunch to the points made by defense lawyer John Henry Browne.
I’ll try and list these by topics:
Federal firepower
Bottini started with Browne’s talk about the vast government resources aimed at Kohring.
The corruption investigation has been going on for some time, he conceded. Prewitt, the lobbyist, said he was first contacted more than three years ago. The electronic surveillance lasted almost a full year, from September, 2005, to August, 2006.
Browne wants the jury to think all this firepower was called down on Kohring, Bottini said, but “You’ve heard the names that have been mentioned in this trial.”
“This has been a long-running and very detailed investigation, and Vic Kohring got caught up in it.
Where’s the witnesses?
Browne had asked why the prosecutors didn’t bring in legislators to testify that Kohring lobbied them.
Bottini told the jurors that Browne could have subpoenaed these witnesses in too.
“Go head and call them,” he said.
As for the prosecution only playing select parts of the Kohring tapes, Bottini said: “If he thought there was something that we were hiding from you in this trial, hit play. It’s the button with the little arrow on it.”
’Sleazy lobbyist’
Bottini said that Browne refers to Prewitt, the government’s witness, as a “sleazy lobbyist.”
“It didn’t stop this guy from going out to dinner with him, and getting his meal paid for by Mr. Prewitt,” Bottini said, pointing at Kohring.
Loan or payment?
Sure, Kohring talked about getting a loan from Veco, Bottini said. But
it wasn’t just a loan he was looking for, he said, Kohring wanted the
Veco execs to solve his problem.
“(Veco vice president Rick Smith) thought Kohring just wanted this taken care of, period,” he said.
Allen’s brain
Browne says you can’t believe what Allen says, Bottini told the jury. “He’s addled. He’s a drunk. He’s confused.”
Bottini said Allen has a brain injury that affects his ability to express himself, but not his thought process. He pointed to Allen’s success as a businessman as proof he’s on the ball.
“Here’s a guy, you know, that built Veco from ground zero,” he said, adding that Allen remained chairman right up until the end.
Gift versus bribe
Bottini looked to make a point that the prosecution had asked Allen
about earlier in the trial: That the “Easter egg” money Allen handed to
Kohring was a big deal.
You heard Allen say that one of the things the investigators showed Allen when they first contacted him was the March 30 tape of money changing hands, Bottini told jurors.
“He knew his hash was cooked as soon as he saw that tape ... Allen knew it was over right there,” Bottini said.
Bottini talked about Allen and Kohring having a business relationship, not a friendship.
“(Kohring) knows what it took to get Mr. Allen to give him things. Kohring turned this guy into a human ATM machine.”
He gave the March 30 conversation as an example, saying there’s no coincidence Kohring tells the Veco honchos about his debt –saying it could hurt him politically – during the session as important legislation hangs in the balance.
All Kohring had to offer was the sign screwed on his door in Juneau: the one that said legislator, Bottini said: “He took that sign off the door, ladies and gentlemen, and he handed it to Bill Allen.”
“He didn’t give it as a gift, thought. He sold it to him.”
Final word from the prosecution
Posted: October 31, 2007 - 5:36 pm
You know that placard that Kohring's lawyer put in front of the jury that said "Not guilty means not proven?"
Bottini took a black marker to it, crossing out words until it read: "Guilty ... proven."
