« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Today's Must Read
The $525,000 payment on Duke Cunningham's mortgage, the Sea-Doo Speedsters, the thousands of dollars of meals, the prostitutes, $12,000 worth of furniture... there's an "innocent explanation" for all of this, Brent Wilkes' lawyer Mark Geragos told a jury in his opening statement yesterday. Or as he put it himself: "Every single one of these transactions they're alleging is a bribe has an innocent explanation they don't want you to hear." By our count, that would be at least a couple dozen innocent explanations. And, boy, do we want to hear.
So it seems that Geragos is really going for the gold. Wilkes was just another defense contractor trying to make a living, he'll argue, and prosecutors have arbitrarily focused on him. Why? As Geragos argued: "You're going to find that everyone's got a little ax to grind here, not least the government, who seem to want to make this a referendum on how Washington works." More than $700,000 worth of gifts and payments in, $90 million in defense contracts out. That's how Washington works. And Geragos aims to prove it. Don't forget that he's already issued subpoenas to a dozen members of Congress, with special focus on five sitting lawmakers in particular.
From the opening statement, it's evident that another strategy of Geragos' will be to cast Mitchell Wade as the real bad guy here, relying, it seems, on Cunningham's semi-literate letter from prison to Marcus Stern, the reporter who broke the story. In that letter, other than complaining that Stern always focused on the bribery and not on the good things that Cunningham had achieved in his career (like "Library Man of the Year"), Cunningham announced that "truth will come out and you will find out how liablist [sic] you have & will be." It was a stirring example of denial. And the root for how it all went wrong, Cunningham argued, was that "absolute devil" Mitch Wade.
Of course, Cunningham's anger might have had a lot to do with the fact that Wade had been the first to go to the feds. And in a subsequent interview with the FBI, Cunningham gave a different story, detailing how he and Wilkes had hid various bribes in order not to arouse suspicion.
But that's Wilkes' story, and he's sticking to it. And he says that if prosecutors don't haul Cunningham out of jail to testify, then he's going to do it himself.
Let the show begin.
Comments (15)
Michael Lafferty wrote on October 10, 2007 10:31 AM:And, we all remember how that spirited defense offered by Mark Geragos of Scott Peterson went, don't we?
Celebrity attorneys: yikes!
31tudor wrote on October 10, 2007 10:36 AM:Geragos is a loser, ask Scott Peterson, Susan McDougal, Gary Condit, Winona Ryder, etc.
JMOHR wrote on October 10, 2007 10:54 AM:This country is on the decline because of the amorality of attorneys such as Geragos. I am a recovering attorney. I became dispirited with the practice of law with the constant divorce of professionalism and incorporation of sleazy business ethics. Given the long and checkered history of the legal profession, our current lows certainly constitute an earth breaking achievement.
The rule of law has been eroded by the wealthy, the politically connected and the Bush administrations bold leadership by example. We have regressed to the age of the Robber Barons under which shady practices and the oppression of all but an elite oligarchy were the primary servants of the law. We see the greatest expression of this new ethic with the Geragos defense of "I committed no crime because everyone breaks the law."
heh wrote on October 10, 2007 11:09 AM:JMOHR:
"I committed no crime because everyone breaks the law."
I tried telling that to a cop when he was about to give me a speeding ticket. I told him I was keeping up with the flow of traffic. He said, I have to ticket SOMEone.
when you pay a high priced lawyer to attempt to justify your crime like that we all lose. Its a pervasive ethic apparently among elites. These folks just think the laws are for the peasants. I hope the jurors see the fundamental flaw in Geragos' arguments. Geez
pathetic.
Captain USA wrote on October 10, 2007 11:40 AM:"That's just how business is done in Washington" doesn't seem like much of a defense.
dasher wrote on October 10, 2007 11:54 AM:"I hope the jurors see the fundamental flaw in Geragos' arguments."
Let's hope there's a decent prosecutor who will HELP the jurors see those flaws!
Alguien wrote on October 10, 2007 12:10 PM:31tudor wrote on October 10, 2007 10:36 AM:
Geragos is a loser, ask Scott Peterson, Susan McDougal, Gary Condit, Winona Ryder, etc.
[your forgot Michael Jackson in your list of infamous celebrities...]
Anonymous wrote on October 10, 2007 1:06 PM:Why is Mark Geragos is a loser?
Isn't he getting paid OBSCENE amounts of money for pretending to defend the undefensible, after all?
Why would any decent lawyer risk his reputation if there wasn't so much money in play?
With the exception of Scott Peterson (whose case he accepted just to get hismelf some free advertising) the rest of his clients are invariably
a)filthy rich
b)guilty as hellbeyond any resonable doubt
So, at the end of the trial, they end up going to jail anyway and Geragos gets paid anyway. Doesn't sound like a loser to me...
I wish I had a job like that!
What irritates me so much is not $700,000 in bribes, but the $90,000,000 which "We the People" were required to chip in (or go to jail) as the payoff.
This corruption in Washington is literally taking away money for our kid's college education, the ability to buy homes, cars, retirements, and a host of other things, but the most important item these clown are stealing is "Time".
Honest folks work hard for their money, and these congressmen and senators, along with their cronies, are stealing years of our lives which cannot be replaced.
Over a third of our workday is now going to pay mandatory taxes. This equates to about 80 days a year that we will never get back.
And where is it going? Well, Congress has decided these eighty days are to be given to them and their cronies. they are stealing days of our lives that can never be regained.
And when/if they are caught... usually handslapping and/or minimum time... because, after all, they have so graciously given their lives to the public. HOGWASH!!!
And if "We the People" disagree to this fraud... jail...
The recovering attorney is right... the rule of law is gone... the pigs rule in Animal Farm...
VictorLaszlo wrote on October 10, 2007 3:24 PM:"Don't forget that he's already issued subpoenas to a dozen members of Congress, with special focus on five sitting lawmakers in particular."
"Subpoena"... that means "you can show up if you feel like it", right?
don de drain wrote on October 10, 2007 3:42 PM:Geragos is not a "loser." He may be lots of other things. His arguments may be absurd, etc., but he should be allowed to raise all colorable defenses on his client's behalf. Everyone accused of a crime gets the benefit of that in our system, even the McVeighs, Padillas, Alberto Gonzalezes, Dick Cheneys and Scooter Libbys of the world. You may not like Wilkes, but he is not guilty of anything until the jury comes back with the guilty verdict.
The best thing that can happen if Geragos raises absurd arguments is that the jury (or judge, if he goes too far afield) rejects them.
Also, remember the discrepancy between what Geragos said in his opening statement in the Scott P trial and what evidence actually came out at that trial? Jurors remember those discrepancies when they retire to deliberate the case.
One of my own discomforts with Geragos is (based on the Scott P trial) the fact that he puts things in his opening argument that he can't prove at trial. That is something I would never do.
I can't speak to whether he represents only rich people who are invariably found guilty. His firm is undoubtedly handling many other cases that are not reported in the press. You can't take a measure of an attorney until you know all the cases he is working (and has worked) on.
While there are plenty of attorneys without good values and ethics, there are plenty of attorneys with good values and ethics, some of who represent high profile clients. I can't speak to Geragos' values or ethics, as I don't know him personally. Tom Mesereau is a good example of someone who does high profile client work and who has good values and ethics.
The lack of quality representation for those who don't have lots of $$ is a real problem in this country. Some attorneys (myself included) take cases pro bono or for reduced fees. Geragos' firm may do that as well. The fees paid by Wilkes may very well allow his firm to handle other pro bono matters. Don't condemn all attorneys for the failure of some of them to act responsibly and ethically.
wordvarc wrote on October 10, 2007 7:55 PM:IS THIS BRAZEN CROOK WORTHY OF HABEAS CORPUS AND A FAIR AND 'SPEEDY' TRIAL?
YES!
Sometimes it's sad, other times it's hilarious but we all value a person getting the best defense possible in any US court.
RESTORE HABEAS CORPUS TO ALL US COURTS AND TRIBUNALS!
wordvarc wrote on October 10, 2007 7:58 PM:IS THIS BRAZEN CROOK WORTHY OF HABEAS CORPUS AND A FAIR AND 'SPEEDY' TRIAL?
YES!
Sometimes it's sad, other times it's hilarious but we all value a person getting the best defense possible in any US court.
RESTORE HABEAS CORPUS TO ALL US COURTS AND TRIBUNALS!
John wrote on October 10, 2007 9:41 PM:So there are innocent explanations that we *still* aren't hearing--how much longer does Wilkes require to get his stories(s) straight?
Roberta wrote on October 10, 2007 10:58 PM:"Assistant U.S. Attorney Phillip Halpern told the panel that Defense Department employees would testify about arm-twisting at the hands of Cunningham to get them to continue using Wilkes' services and buying computer gear supplied by Wilkes' company -- even though the product was faulty and the equipment was incompatible" [North County Times, 10/10/07].
Jeez, I'm glad all the U.S Attorney muck got exposed. Otherwise, this trial might be an exercise in futility--or might not have occurred. Halpern is part of the staff that worked with Carol Lam, who headed up the case against Cunningham.
Can you imagine if Rove had been completely successful in purging the U.S. Attorneys of career lawyers? Bye bye Halpern.
Wilkes's co-conspirator John Michael tried to have Halpern--and the entire USA office for San Diego--removed from the case because Halpern's late uncle, Leonard Halpern, who died in 2003 and whom Halpern had not seen for four years previous to his death, lived a couple of doors away from Tommy Kontogiannis, John Michael's uncle [http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070830/news_1m30michael.html]. After Uncle Leonard died, Tommy's daughter bought his home from his widow, using the time-tested methods for evading taxes, money laundering, mortgage fraud, etc. for which Tommy has become renowned. And unlike Phillip Halpern, John Michael has been VERY involved with his uncle's business dealings.
These are desperate, pathetic people. They should be punished most especially for taking tax dollars for services they could not provide. Bribes are ugly, but profiteering is unforgivable, wartime or not.
Curious George wrote on October 11, 2007 5:58 PM:So Roberta... You KNOW that John Michael was "very involved" in his uncles business? How pray tell...??? This is the WILKES trial... Let John Michael's trial work itself... I am more curious than ever to see what the hell Geragos will pull to help his client out of the mess he's in... I am sure your over baring statements are nothing more than a rant and GOD Forgive you if you should ever fall victim to a true conspiracy involving a family member and the US government against YOU... Don't trow stones Roberta till you've been there...
"RESTORE HABEAS CORPUS TO ALL US COURTS AND TRIBUNALS!"