The jury in the trial of former Jack Abramoff lobbying associate Kevin Ring was split -- eight to convict and four to acquit -- according to a juror interviewed by Main Justice.
Ring was on trial on eight counts of conspiracy, illegal gratuities and honest services wire fraud, and the judge declared a mistrial after jurors announced they were deadlocked for three consecutive days. The jury originally arrived at a verdict on one of the honest services wire fraud charges, but later lost unanimity on that charge. Jurors had found Ring not guilty on that charge, but after further deliberations they split -- five to convict, six to acquit and one undecided, the juror revealed.
One sticking point for the juror, who voted to acquit, was that the government based a large part of its case on e-mails between Ring, Abramoff, other lobbyists and public officials.
Ring "could have had a lot of intentions, and those emails weren't enough to spell them out," the juror said. "If the prosecution could have discriminated between lobbying and corrupt lobbying better, then they would have made their case."
But another juror, Joy Stevenson, who voted to convict, said "the e-mail traffic" convinced her Ring was guilty. She said the e-mails showed her that Ring and the other lobbyists were "very shrewd... very careful... very strategic."
The case is set to be retried in June 2010, allowing time for the statute of limitations on potential charges against possible witnesses to expire and for the Supreme Court to hear three cases involving honest services wire fraud charges. Stevenson had some advice for the Department of Justice's next attempt at a conviction: "I think the government, I think those guys were great. I was very impressed with all of them.... But I was looking for them to pull it all together at the end. You know, bam! There was no clincher."
Three years after losing the Montana Senate seat he held for nearly two decades, Republican Conrad Burns is still talking about how the Jack Abramoff scandal cost him the tight 2006 race against Democrat Jon Tester that came down to 3,562 votes.
In an interview this week with KTVQ in Billings, Burns (who is now a registered federal lobbyist at Gage LLC) said the Department of Justice's handling of investigations allowed his name to be tarnished during the campaign, when contributions he received from Abramoff and his office's relationship with the now imprisoned lobbyist were called into question.
"If you call [the Department of Justice] up today and say, 'Well, is Conrad Burns under investigation?', they'll say, 'Well we can't confirm it, we can't deny it,'" Burns said. "Well, that allows your opponents or the press, if they've formed a perception already, to just to run wild with it."
Burns also said he was never interviewed by Justice or the House Ethics Committee, and that the government "didn't interview anybody in the office with the exception of one person." He described implications that he was involved with the Abramoff scandal as "a hoax."
Two of Burns' former staffers were mentioned during the recent trial of former Abramoff lobbying associate Kevin Ring. A former associate of Ring and Abramoff testified about an all-expenses-paid 2001 Super Bowl trip that the lobbying team planned for lawmakers and staffers. No lawmakers attended, and only two Senate staffers, Ryan Thomas and Will Brooke, both of Burns' office, made the trip. Thomas was also listed as a co-conspirator in Ring's trial for evidentiary reasons.
(Thomas is also listed as a registered lobbyist for Gage, Senate lobbying documents show)
A district court judge revealed today that the jury in the trial of former Jack Abramoff lobbying associate Kevin Ring was overwhelmed by the number of e-mails the government used as evidence.
"The wisdom of the [Ring] jury was, 'You gave me way too many e-mails,'' Judge Ellen Huvelle said during a hearing for Horace Cooper, a former legislative and executive branch official who was indicted in August as part of the Abramoff scandal.
Huvelle revealed the information after an attorney for the Department of Justice, Matt Stennes, said that "the bulk of the evidence" in Cooper's case will be e-mails. In Ring's case, jurors were given four large binders filled with evidential documents, which mostly consisted of e-mails sent between Ring, Abramoff, other lobbyists and public officials in the executive and legislative branches.
Huvelle also said that the jurors in Ring's trial "thought the best witness the government had was [Neil] Volz" because he was "the most persuasive."
Continue reading Too Many E-mails Used In Ring Trial, Jury Said.
A district court judge decided on Monday that former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring will go back to the courtroom for the retrial of his lobbying corruption case in June 2010. The next jury, however, may see more witnesses, redefined charges and different evidence, all elements that will make the next trial look significantly different from the one that resulted in a hung jury last week.
The most certain change will be the defense's ability to call a handful of witnesses who invoked their Fifth Amendment rights during the first trial. The statute of limitations on the conspiracy charges against others in the Abramoff scandal expires this month, five years after the last alleged criminal actions occurred in October 2004. That means anyone not yet indicted for conspiracy in the scandal by the end of October is unlikely to be indicted, and Fifth Amendment rights no longer apply.
But for some, the legal issues may bleed over into the end of the tax year in April, because someone who received gifts from Ring should have reported that income on tax forms. That's why Judge Ellen Huvelle has delayed the retrial until June, and she could further delay it if all the legal issues aren't worked out by the summer.
The case will not go to retrial "before I can clear everybody I think are fair witnesses," Huvelle said during Monday's hearing.
She said that the court's conference with the jury after the mistrial was declared last week showed that the jury's deliberations were tripped up by the fact that witnesses were missing.
"There are holes, and the holes are being created by these people pleading the Fifth," Huvelle said.
Former White House aide David Safavian was sentenced to a year in prison today after he was found guilty in two separate trials on four counts of obstruction of justice and false statements related to the Jack Abramoff investigation.
Judge Paul Friedman said he decided on the sentencing for Safavian, who served as General Services Administration chief of staff in George W. Bush's administration, after weighing the need for "deterrence" and "respect of law" with the "suffering" that Safavian's family has endured during four years of trial proceedings. Federal prosecutors had suggested 15 to 21 months in prison.
"Nobody expects you to ever commit another crime," Friedman said. But "sometime in those two or three years" when Safavian was being investigated for his connections to Abramoff, "a light bulb should have gone off."
Safavian was first found guilty on four counts and acquitted on one count in 2006, and he was sentenced to 18 months in prison. In 2008, the conviction was overturned, and in a retrial in December 2008, Safavian was again found guilty on the four counts.
Safavian maintained at the sentencing that while he made mistakes in his relationship with Abramoff -- giving the lobbyist information that would benefit his clients and taking a golf trip to Scotland that was paid for largely by Abramoff, according to trial testimony -- he did not knowingly lie about the relationship during the government's investigations.
"I acknowledge severe lapses in judgment in regard to my relationship with Jack Abramoff," he told the judge. But "I can't stand here and say I intentionally" lied to investigators, he added.
A district court judge declared a mistrial on all eight counts in the trial of former Jack Abramoff lobbying associate Kevin Ring today after jurors said in a note to the judge that they were "totally blocked" and could not come to a verdict on any charge.
Judge Ellen Huvelle asked the jury foreman if any amount of time would change the jury's deadlock. "No, your honor," he responded.
Huvelle said earlier today that she would be declaring a mistrial on seven of the eight charges after jurors said in a note that they were deadlocked on those charges. But the judge asked the jury to return to deliberations on the final charge after jurors said they were no longer unanimous on a verdict for that count, though they had claimed to have reached unanimity on it earlier in the week.
After about two hours of additional deliberation, the jury remained deadlocked on the eighth charge, a count of honest services wire fraud that involved the wife of former Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif., who had been employed by Abramoff's lobbying team.
The court will now begin hearings to determine if and when the case will be retried. Immediately after Huvelle declared a mistrial, attorneys for the prosecution and defense met with the jury to learn some details of their deliberations. Based on that information, the prosecution may decide not to retry Ring if the jury was near acquittal, or Ring may decide to take a plea deal with the government if the jury was near conviction.
Huvelle said that a retrial will likely not begin until at least January. The defense argued that the court should further delay a retrial because of pending Supreme Court cases that could affect the honest services wire fraud statute, among other concerns.
"I think it would be a mistake" to rush to an immediate retrial, Ring's attorney, Andrew Wise said.
A district court judge said today that she would be declaring a mistrial on seven of the eight counts against former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring, after the jury declared in a note to the judge for the third time that it could not reach a unanimous decision on the charges.
"We are declaring a mistrial," Judge Ellen Huvelle told the prosecution and defense attorneys, though she did not inform the jury of her decision.
The jury's note also said that jurors were no longer unanimous on the eighth count, a charge of honest services wire fraud involving the wife of former Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif., who was given a job with Abramoff's lobbying team. On Tuesday, jurors said they had reached unanimity on that count, but they did not reveal the verdict. The jury will reconvene this afternoon to determine whether or not they can return to unanimity on that count.
Judge Huvelle also said that the prosecution and defense attorneys will meet with the jury, perhaps this afternoon, to learn some details of their deliberations.
"I want you to have the opportunity to mull over what you've learned" from the jury ahead of a possible retrial, Judge Huvelle told the attorneys.
Ring's attorney, Andrew Wise, objected to an expedited retrial because the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear three cases in the coming months regarding the honest services wire fraud statute, which accounted for six of the eight charges against Ring. Because the Supreme Court may change the interpretation of the statute by addressing the "fundamental underlying problems with the vagueness of the statute," an immediate retrial would be "silly," he said.
The government may decide not to retry the case if it learns that the jury was close to acquitting Ring. Prosecutor Nathaniel Edmonds said that the government will try to "come to resolution on this" with Ring before moving to a retrial.
The prosecution and defense in the trial of former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring called for a mistrial today after the jury indicated for the second time that it was unable to reach a verdict on seven of the eight charges. The judge declined to call a mistrial and instructed the jury to continue deliberating.
"We do not see how we can reach a verdict," the jury's note to Judge Ellen Huvelle read. The jury sent a similar note Tuesday afternoon indicating it had reached a consensus only on one count of honest services wire fraud, but it did not reveal the verdict on that count.
After reviewing the note, attorneys for Ring and the Department of Justice agreed that it was time to release the jurors. In the case of a hung jury, a mistrial is declared and the case can be reheard.
"Let them go. ... Declare a mistrial," Andrew Wise, Ring's attorney, said. "This jury has been at it for an extended period."
"Take the verdict [on the one count], declare a mistrial... and get another trial moving as quickly as possible," prosecutor Nathaniel Edmonds suggested.
Huvelle, however, is not ready to dismiss the jury after more than three weeks of trial and more than a week of jury deliberations. Today is the jury's seventh day of deliberations, but that is not an extraordinary amount of time "given the length of the trial, the amount of evidence and the complications of the case," Huvelle said.
"I am going to ask you to continue to deliberate," she told the jury.
The Supreme Court said Tuesday it will hear a case involving honest services wire fraud, one of the charges for which Kevin Ring, a former associate of Jack Abramoff, is on trial.
The court will hear an appeal in the case of former Enron CEO Jeff Skilling, who was convicted in 2006 on 19 counts and says his conviction is not proper because he did not personally benefit from his actions, AP reports.
The appeal, expected to be heard in February, "will focus on the 'honest services law,' a federal statute that has become a formidable weapon of prosecutors but which defense lawyers say is so vague as to make unwitting criminals out of many people," the New York Times reports.
The jury in the Ring trial reached a decision on one of the honest services charges against him on Tuesday, but remains undecided on the other counts.
Two other cases related to the honest services fraud statute -- USA v. Black and USA v. Weyhrauch -- are expected to be heard by the Supreme Court soon, and the presiding judge in Ring's trial, Ellen Huvelle, has expressed concern that the eventual decision in that case could be overturned if the Supreme Court redefines the honest services statute in its decisions.
Jurors in the trial of former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring have reached a verdict on one count of honest services wire fraud and appear to be deadlocked on the other seven charges, AP reports.
According to the AP, "on the still-undecided counts" -- related to conspiracy, illegal gratuities and honest services wire fraud -- "jurors sent a note to the judge saying their deliberations had been contentious and that arguments had shown no sign of movement toward a verdict."
The jury has decided on the one count of honest services wire fraud that related to a $5,000 check deposited by the wife of former Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif. The government alleged during the trial that Ring helped Julia Doolittle obtain a job with Abramoff's lobbying team that paid her $5,000 a month, for a total of $96,000 over about a year and a half, for little work.
The jury is not revealing its verdict on that charge and will continue deliberations on the other charges Wednesday morning.
The jury in the trial of former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring asked for clarification today about the existence of rules that would have stopped lobbyists from giving expensive gifts to public officials under old lobbying regulations.
The jury gave a note to the judge this morning asking whether a "monetary limit" was imposed on lobbyists for gifts to public officials between 2000 and 2004. Ring is on trial for allegedly giving tickets and meals to public officials in exchange for official acts benefiting his lobbying clients during that period.
"The answer is: no monetary limits," Judge Ellen Huvelle told the jury in response.
Huvelle met with prosecution and defense lawyers today before giving her response to the jury. Both sides agreed that during the contested time period, lobbyists were not expressly prohibited from giving gifts above a certain value.
Nathaniel Edmonds, an attorney for the Department of Justice, did ask Huvelle to further instruct that "giving of a thing of value with a corrupt intent, regardless of the monetary amount, may be a violation of criminal law."
Ring's defense attorney, Andrew Wise, countered that the jury simply wanted to know if the monetary limits existed and the government's requested instruction would be "suggestive to the jury in a way that is not appropriate."
Huvelle denied Edmonds' request for the extended instruction.
Prior to 2007, when Congress passed the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act, lawmakers and staffers were not allowed to accept gifts from lobbyists above a value of $50 per gift, or more than $100 in gifts from a single source in a calendar year. The rules did not apply to lobbyists giving gifts, but under the new law, lobbyists are expressly prohibited from giving gifts they know lawmakers or staffers are not allowed to accept.
The jury continued its sixth day of deliberations after receiving Huvelle's instructions.
Updated at 9:42 a.m. on Oct. 13.
Armed with a verdict form, 68 pages of jury instructions, notes taken during the trial and several binders full of evidence, the jury in the trial of former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring spent the better part of last week deliberating on eight separate criminal counts.
How the trial will turn out, no one can know, but it is possible Ring will be found guilty on some counts but not others. In Judge Ellen Huvelle's instructions, the jury is specifically warned not to let the verdict on one count impact another.
"The fact that you may find the defendant guilty or not guilty on any one count of the indictment should not control or influence your verdict with respect to the other counts of the indictment," she said.
Split verdicts are sometimes the result of "jury compromise," said Daniel Richman, a professor at Columbia University with expertise in federal criminal law.
"Jurors from time to time believe that one way out of difficult deliberations is by rendering a unanimous split verdict," Richman said. But a jury finding a defendant guilty on some counts and not guilty on other counts is not the most common circumstance, because "by and large juries understand cases in broad brush strokes," he added.
Here is a guide to the charges that the jury is deliberating on:
The defense in the trial of former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring called for a mistrial today after the jury foreman informed the judge that a barred piece of evidence had been included in the jurors' packets, Main Justice is reporting.
Judge Ellen Huvelle did not call a mistrial, but gave the jury instructions to disregard the piece of evidence -- the plea deal for Robert Coughlin, a former liaison in the Department of Justice's Office of Legislative Affairs.
Huvelle "explained that Coughlin's plea deal was in no way evidence of Ring's guilt and that he did not plead guilty to any of the charges Ring is facing," according to Main Justice.
In one charge, the government alleges that Ring gave Coughlin meals and sports and entertainment tickets in exchange for assistance in obtaining a $16.3 million jail-building grant from the Department of Justice for a client, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, and other matters. In another charge, the government alleges Ring gave Coughlin eight Washington Wizards basketball tickets in exchange for assistance in gaining an expedited admittance from the Immigration and Naturalization Service for students wanting to attend a school founded by Abramoff.
Coughlin's plea deal was introduced as evidence by the government, and though it had been struck as evidence, it remained in the jury's binders. The jury foreman told the judge today he had given the plea deal a "cursory" review before realizing it was mistakenly included in the binders, Main Justice reports. Coughlin was not called to testify in the trial.
Jury deliberations began on Monday afternoon, and after this morning's interruption, are now continuing.
Just a few years ago, lobbyist Jack Abramoff wielded an "endless expense account" and "nearly endless tickets" for entertaining public officials, a former "Team Abramoff" lobbyist said in testimony during the trial of Kevin Ring, another former member of the lobbying team. So much has changed since, though, that the decision in the case -- which went to the jury this week -- is unlikely to impact the lobbying industry.
"Congress has already legislatively dealt with the problems that are being illustrated in this trial," said Marc Elias, an attorney with Perkins Coie who specializes in ethics and white collar criminal matters.
In 2007, largely as a reaction to the Abramoff scandal and others like it, Congress passed the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act, which increased lobbying disclosure requirements and further restricted gifts to lawmakers and staffers.
The trial has illustrated how different life was for lobbyists not long ago. The government alleges that between 2000 and 2004, Ring used sports and entertainment tickets, meals and drinks to influence public officials and reward them for acts that benefited his clients.
In presenting evidence, the government has valued some of those restaurant tabs and sought-after tickets -- including 2002 NCAA tournament games and floor seats to Wizards basketball games -- at hundreds of dollars. Abramoff's lobbying team spent more than $5.1 million on suites at D.C.-area sporting venues in the five-year time period, according to an estimate by the FBI presented during the trial. And Ann Copland, a former aide to Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., received personal gifts valued at about $25,000 from members of Team Abramoff including Ring, according to a Department of Justice estimate that Copland cited during testimony.
Continue reading Trial Shows Much Has Changed Post-Abramoff.
In the trial of Kevin Ring, a former associate of imprisoned ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff, dozens of names of lobbyists and public officials have been thrown around, countless sporting events and concerts have been discussed and meal after meal has been questioned. But in its final words Monday before the jury was to begin deliberations, the prosecution reminded the 12 individuals who will reach a verdict exactly who was on trial.
"Today is about Kevin Ring," Michael Ferrara, an attorney for the Department of Justice, said during the prosecution's rebuttal of the defense's closing arguments. "It all comes down to Mr. Ring's intent -- no one else's. It is his words [in e-mails] that make his intent plain as day."
But while focusing on Ring, the prosecution also reminded the jury that he was allegedly part of a larger story. To date, 20 people have been convicted, pleaded guilty or are awaiting trial in relation to the Abramoff scandal, and the prosecution questioned how Ring could be the only one who was not guilty.
Ring "wants you to believe everyone got it wrong except him," Ferrara said. "It doesn't make sense, ladies and gentlemen. This was a team -- Team Abramoff."
The government relied on questionable witnesses and did not meet its burden of proof in the trial of former lobbyist Kevin Ring, the defense asserted in its closing arguments today.
"You've been treated to a case that's been long on slogans -- that's been long on guilt by association," Andrew Wise, Ring's attorney, told the jury. But the government's case "has been very short on evidence."
He recalled the testimonies of four cooperating witnesses who have already pleaded guilty for involvement in the Jack Abramoff scandal: Todd Boulanger and Neil Volz, former lobbying associates of Ring and Abramoff; John Albaugh, chief of staff to former Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla.; and Ann Copland, former legislative aide to Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss.
Wise referred to the four as witnesses "whose testimony you must have questions about," and he questioned whether Boulanger in particular "was taking this whole process seriously." The cooperating witnesses "had reasons to tell you things that would help them, even if they hurt Mr. Ring," he said.
The defense also contended that the government failed to provide necessary evidence and witnesses to prove Ring's guilt.
Noting that Ring's ties to former Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif., are "at the core of this case," Wise reminded the jury that "you heard not one word from a single member of that office."
Continue reading Ring Attorney: Prosecution Did Not Do Its Job.
In closing arguments today in the trial of former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring, the prosecution focused on evidence from e-mails to use Ring's "own words" as proof of criminal intent behind the gifts he provided to public officials.
"The point this case is going to come down to is what was Mr. Ring's intent when he gave all those tickets and all those meals," said Michael Leotta, an attorney for the Department of Justice.
Leotta acknowledged that the e-mails used as evidence by the prosecution did not show Ring or other members of "Team Abramoff" plainly admitting to conspiracy, honest services fraud or illegal gratuities. "Nobody talks that way," Leotta said.
But the e-mails do explicitly show Ring's criminal intent without using the legal jargon, he said.
"We want anyone who will really, really help us with specific stuff," read one e-mail Leotta referenced that was sent from Abramoff to Ring about a proposed trip to the 2001 Super Bowl. "That was them discussing honest services fraud," Leotta contended.
Continue reading Prosecution: E-mails Show Ring's Criminal Intent.
After the prosecution spent more than two weeks calling witnesses and presenting evidence in the criminal case against former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring, the jury may have been surprised to find that the defense would not call any witnesses and Ring himself would not testify.
Though jurors are always instructed against drawing inferences from a defense decision not to call witnesses or a defendant's decision not to testify -- since it is the prosecution's legal responsibility to prove guilt -- the defense's apparent lack of a case can have an impact in the real world, legal experts say.
"The jury sees Mr. Ring sitting in the courtroom every day, and yet they don't hear from him," said Marc Elias, an attorney with Perkins Coie who specializes in ethics and white collar criminal matters. The jurors "are human beings. They listen to jury instruction, but you can never be sure."
Ring's attorneys, Andrew Wise and Timothy O'Toole, expressed frustration in court because witnesses they wanted to call, who had worked in the office of former Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif., invoked their Fifth Amendment rights. They said those witnesses -- former Doolittle staffers Peter Evich and David Lopez -- would have given crucial details about Ring's relationship with Doolittle's office.
Before joining Abramoff's lobbying team, Ring was a staffer in Doolittle's office, and prosecution witnesses in the trial described Doolittle as Ring's main "champion" on Capitol Hill.
"None of the speakers are here, and we're trying to do what we can to get some context in front of the jury," O'Toole said during trial proceedings.
Continue reading Ring Defense Obscured As Witnesses Plead Fifth.
After mulling for two days over jury instructions in the trial of former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring, Judge Ellen Huvelle filed them last night.
The instructions, 68 pages long, provide step-by-step explanations of each count for which Ring is being tried.
The document also includes some specific instructions that highlight the complexity of the case, given that the Abramoff investigation dates back to 2004. For example, the instructions acknowledge that four of the witnesses and others who were mentioned during the trial "have pleaded guilty to crimes that arose out of the same events for which Kevin Ring is on trial here." But, the instructions warn, the jurors "must not consider those guilty pleas as any evidence of Mr. Ring's guilt."
Closing arguments are expected on Monday morning, and then the jury will begin deliberations.
Read the jury instructions here.
Action in the trial of Kevin Ring, former associate of imprisoned ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff, has lagged this week as the court determined jury instructions.
But the proceedings will continue next week with closing arguments still expected on Monday morning. Check back with Under the Influence for updates from the courthouse during closing arguments and as the jury comes to a decision.
The lobbying team headed by imprisoned ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff spent more than $5.1 million on suites at D.C.-area sporting venues from 2000 to 2004, according to an estimate by the FBI.
The estimate of expenses at Camden Yards (home of the Baltimore Orioles), FedEx Field (home of the Washington Redskins) and the MCI Center (now the Verizon Center, home of the Washington Wizards and Washington Capitals), were submitted as evidence in the trial of former Abramoff associate Kevin Ring. He is accused of using event tickets and meals to influence and reward public officials for taking acts for his clients. Estimates did not include food and additional tickets purchased by the lobbying team at the venues.
The prosecution has now completed its presentation of evidence. The defense has submitted statements to impeach claims made in the prosecution's case, but the defense will not call any witnesses. Closing statements are expected on Monday.
Kevin Ring, former associate of imprisoned ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff, will not testify in his trial, and his attorneys will likely not call any witnesses in his defense.
Several witnesses the defense wanted to call have invoked the Fifth Amendment to avoid testifying. Those witnesses include David Ayres, who served as chief of staff to former Attorney General John Ashcroft; Laura Ayres, his wife; Peter Evich, who was legislative director to former Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif.; and David Lopez, who was Doolittle's chief of staff.
The prosecution is expected to finish its case on Tuesday with a summarizing witness who will read into the record additional evidential e-mails, and the defense is then expected to submit statements into the record to impeach six statements in the prosecution's case.
The prosecution and defense will likely present closing statements on Wednesday, and the jury is expected to go into deliberations at the end of next week.
Judge Ellen Huvelle ruled today that former Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla., would not be admitted as a co-conspirator, but she did admit the rest of the officials and lobbyists on the prosecution's co-conspirator list: Doolittle and his wife, Julie; Evich; Lopez; John Albaugh, Istook's former chief of staff; Laura Blackann, Doolittle's former communications director; Ann Copland, legislative aide to former Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss.; Robert Coughlin, a former liaison in the Department of Justice's Office of Legislative Affairs; Jennifer Farley, former deputy assistant directory of the White House Office of Intergovernmental Affairs; Will Heaton, chief of staff to former Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio; Greg Orlando, Doolittle's former legislative director; and Ryan Thomas, an aide to former Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont.
Listing those individuals as co-conspirators means their statements from e-mails can be admitted as evidence rather than hearsay. The classification of "co-conspirator" does not necessarily mean they are being charged with a crime.
Lobbyists on "Team Abramoff" sometimes had to get creative when justifying tickets and trips to congressional staffers who worried about ethics compliance, a former lobbying associate of Kevin Ring and Jack Abramoff said Thursday during testimony in Ring's trial.
The lobbyists were worried about the appearance of compliance with congressional ethics rules, not actual compliance, testified Todd Boulanger, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit honest services fraud in January.
Boulanger detailed a Super Bowl trip that Team Abramoff planned for lawmakers and staffers in January 2001. In the end, no members of Congress and only two Senate staffers attended. Ring did not go on the trip "because he didn't have anyone he invited going," Boulanger said.
But after the two Senate staffers, Ryan Thomas and Will Brooke, who worked for then-Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., "asked for documentation on how they could attend" the Super Bowl trip, justifying the expensive excursion became a priority for the lobbying team, Boulanger said. First, the lobbyists considered classifying the trip as a fundraiser, then Ring suggested labeling the trip a "tribute" to members of Congress, Boulanger recalled.
"If we wanted the two Senate staffers to attend, [giving them a justification] was important," he said. "I wanted to make them comfortable."
A former associate of ex-lobbyists Kevin Ring and Jack Abramoff said in testimony at Ring's trial Thursday that other lobbying firms used the same tools used by "Team Abramoff," that many of the controversial statements made by Ring in e-mails were jokes, and that a Department of Justice official allegedly bribed by Ring was not a decision-maker on a crucial project. All three of these claims are key pillars of the defense's argument.
During cross-examination by the defense, Todd Boulanger, a former member of Team Abramoff, said that when he took officials to sporting events and restaurants, he often saw congressional staffers accompanied by lobbyists from other firms.
Ring's attorney, Andrew Wise, had argued in his opening statement that Ring's lobbying practices were commonplace: "Don't buy into the idea that this was somehow a rogue operation and no one else was doing it."
Wise had also argued in his opening statement that many of Ring's e-mails, which make up a large part of the government's evidence, were jokes, not proof of the defendant's actions or intentions. Witnesses in the trial, however, have so far not fully corroborated that. Neil Volz, another former associate on Abramoff's lobbying team, said that "some elements" of the e-mails were jokes but other elements were not.
But Boulanger on Thursday insisted that most of the e-mails in question were indeed nothing more than jokes. "We all sent some fairly outrageous e-mails," he said. He did admit, however, that one e-mail, in which Ring wrote that a DOJ official could "pay us back" for receiving a basketball ticket, was not a joke.
Continue reading Witness: Abramoff Methods Used By Other Firms.
Updated Oct. 2 with clarification.
Crying witnesses, colorful e-mails and descriptions of lobbyists as "sugar daddies" and congressmen as their "champions" -- it's all become routine in the trial of Kevin Ring, former associate of imprisoned ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff. With a full cast of former lobbyists and congressional staffers who have already pleaded guilty in the scandal testifying as cooperating witnesses, courtroom drama has yet to cease, and it's only bound to continue as the defense is expected to begin presenting evidence next week.
As they fight a conviction, Ring's lawyers have the tough job of separating their client from all that intrigue. He was indicted on 10 criminal counts last year for honest services wire fraud, providing illegal gratuities, conspiracy to commit those crimes and obstruction of justice. In a pre-trial hearing, Judge Ellen Huvelle ruled to move the two obstruction of justice charges into a separate trial, unless they are settled out of court.
The eight charges against Ring in this trial hold a maximum combined sentence of 127 years jail time. Abramoff received a sentence of six total years for his guilty pleas in two fraud and bribery cases, and other "Team Abramoff" lobbyists who pleaded guilty have received probation and fines instead of jail time.
Ring was offered plea agreements by the government, but unlike the vast majority of individuals caught up in the scandal -- about 20 former lobbyists, congressional staffers, executive officials and one congressman, former Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio -- Ring pleaded not guilty and chose to go to trial. Only one other individual, former White House aide David Safavian, has gone to trial rather than pleading guilty. He was found guilty of lying and obstructing justice twice: first in July 2006, then in a retrial in December 2008.
So what makes Ring different? Legal experts point to Ring's interactions with the Department of Justice leading up to the trial, his status as a lobbyist and the cost of a trial.
The court watched a little basketball today in the trial of former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring, as the prosecution tried to demonstrate the value of the tickets they allege Ring swapped for favors from officials.
Todd Boulanger, a former lobbying associate of Ring and Abramoff, identified Robert Coughlin on video watching Michael Jordan from seats a few rows behind the basket at a Washington Wizards game. In e-mail evidence, Coughlin, a former liaison in the Department of Justice's Office of Legislative Affairs, asked Ring for basketball tickets.
According to evidence, Coughlin assisted Ring and "Team Abramoff" with information on how to obtain a jail-building grant from the Department of Justice for one of their clients, the Mississippi Band of the Choctaw Indians. The Department of Justice had approved a grant of $9 million for the jail, but the tribe wanted $16 million.
The jail project was the most important project for the Choctaw, and the tribe was one of Team Abramoff's most important clients, Boulanger said in testimony today. The tribe paid the lobbying firm about $120,000 every month, he reported.
Continue reading Jury Watches DoJ Official Using Ring's Tickets.
A staffer-turned-lobbyist said the "endless expense account" and "nearly endless tickets" at "Team Abramoff" gave him and other former members of the lobbying team, including Kevin Ring and Jack Abramoff, greater access to public officials than other lobbyists.
"We had more tools than most," Todd Boulanger said in testimony Tuesday in the trial of Ring. "It was a tremendous advantage over some of the other folks in the lobbying world."
Boulanger said that Ring joked about his use of tickets and meals in lobbying. "Hello quid, where's the pro quo?" Boulanger reported Ring saying to him on several occasions.
Boulanger, who worked as a legislative assistant for former Sen. Bob Smith, R-N.H., before joining the lobbying team with Abramoff and Ring at Preston Gates & Ellis and then Greenberg Traurig, described the common practice within his team of avoiding disclosure of recipients of gifts, even internally.
"I will not put names on a receipt ever," Boulanger wrote in a 2002 e-mail to Abramoff regarding a Greenberg Traurig request to fill in information on accounting forms about guests at expensed lunches.
"I didn't want people to find out who we were taking out," Boulanger said in explaining the e-mail, saying the team's rule of thumb was that if a newspaper item about a member of the firm having lunch with a particular individual was going to be embarrassing, it was best not to "leave a paper trail."
He said he dismissed lobbying guideline manuals that were given to him and other lobbyists by the firms.
"Quite frankly, I didn't pay much attention to [the guidelines]," Boulanger said. "Nobody did."
Boulanger pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit honest services fraud in January, and he named Abramoff and Ring as co-conspirators in his plea. He is awaiting sentence.
Greg Harris of the Department of Justice also testified Tuesday afternoon about funding for a jail on behalf of a major "Team Abramoff" client, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, and other interactions with Ring. Boulanger's testimony will continue today.
Though she pleaded guilty earlier this year to taking official actions because of tickets and meals given to her by lobbyists, a former Senate staffer said today in testimony that her actions would have been the same with or without the gifts. Ann Copland, a legislative aide to Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., for nearly 30 years, testified this morning in the trial of Kevin Ring, a former associate of Jack Abramoff.
"The receipt of the tickets and the meals made the lobbyists more accessible to me, and I took official actions during that time. I knew it was their job to influence me," Copland said during cross-examination by the defense. But she insisted that no single action was taken "because of the tickets."
While in Cochran's office, Copland worked primarily on issues concerning the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, a lobbying client of Ring and "Team Abramoff."
Copland said that she would have taken the same actions she took for the Choctaw whether their concerns were brought to her by the lobbyists or directly from the tribe.
"I can't imagine not helping the Choctaw," she said. "They were constituents."
Copland said that she also received gifts directly from the Choctaw -- plane tickets, hotel suites, spa visits and art items -- but those gifts were permitted under an exception to the Senate rules that allowed gifts from Native American tribes and other government entities. She said her boss, Cochran, likely knew about those gifts, but she did not tell him about the tickets she received from the lobbying firm because "he would not approve."
Copland characterized Ring as a policy wonk who understood the political process "sometimes better than I understood it." Ring continued working with Copland on Choctaw-related issues after the Abramoff scandal emerged, and he moved to a new lobbying firm, Barnes & Thornburg, where he no longer provided Copland with tickets or meals.
Copland's testimony has now concluded. Greg Harris of the Department of Justice will testify next about Team Abramoff's lobbying of the agency. Todd Boulanger, a lobbying associate of Ring and Abramoff, is also expected to begin testimony this afternoon.
Tickets and meals Ann Copland received from lobbyists while employed as a congressional staffer made "life a little easier" and "a little more fun," the former aide to Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., said in testimony at the trial of former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring on Monday.
Copland allegedly received personal gifts valued at about $25,000 from members of "Team Abramoff," including Ring, the Department of Justice estimated. She pleaded guilty for accepting those gifts in March.
Most of the correspondence the prosecution asked Copland about was between herself and Todd Boulanger, an Abramoff lobbying associate who pleaded guilty in January and is expected to begin testifying in the Ring trial on Wednesday.
"I did not feel like I could tell Todd 'no'... because he treated me very well, which included, in large part, the tickets," Copland said. According to Monday's testimony, she assisted members of "Team Abramoff" on legislative issues for two of their clients, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians and Primedia.
Copland requested tickets for an array of sporting and entertainment events, including Orioles games, Redskins games, an Aerosmith concert, an American Idols concert and a figure skating championship, and she sometimes gave the tickets to other staffers in her office instead of using them herself. In June 2003, she used Abramoff's suite at an Orioles game, along with refreshments in the suite provided by the lobbying firm, for her son's birthday party.
"I accepted gifts from the lobbyists -- the tickets and the meals -- and accepting those things had some influence on decisions I was making while [working] in the Senate," Copland said.
A former House staffer testified in former lobbyist Kevin Ring's federal trial today that he knew it was wrong to take gifts from Ring, and when the Jack Abramoff scandal emerged, he recognized the illegality of his actions. Ring, who worked under Ambramoff, faces a variety of charges, including conspiring to provide illegal gratuities.
"I went to work thinking, 'I'm going to do something I think is wrong today,'" John Albaugh, former chief of staff to former Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla., said of the period between 2003 and 2004 when he received tickets and meals from Ring while helping Ring secure earmarks to fund projects for clients. Albaugh said he continued despite knowing the wrongfulness of his actions because he wanted to help Istook be "successful." Ring was a major political donor to Istook, and he helped plan fundraisers for the congressman.
After the investigations into Abramoff started, "I began to be concerned I may have broken the law," Albaugh said in his testimony. "I had terrors in the night.... I suffered. I knew I had broken the law."
The FBI searched Albaugh's house in April 2008, which Albaugh said did not surprise him.
"When my wife came to me and said, 'The FBI is here,' I knew what they were there for," he said.
After agreeing to cooperate with the government in their investigation, Albaugh regained a "peace in my soul I didn't have for a number of years," he said.
Albaugh pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit honest services fraud last year. He named Ring as his co-conspirator in his testimony.
In his cross-examination of the witnesses, Ring's attorney, Andrew Wise, cast doubt on the trustworthiness of Albaugh's testimony. He called into question Albaugh's recollection of dates and events -- Albaugh repeatedly answered "I don't know" to his questions about specific lunches and sporting events -- and questioned whether he favored earmarks that would benefit his brother's business dealings in South Carolina.
Wise also questioned Albaugh's loyalty to his former employer in describing a phone call Albaugh made to Istook that was secretly recorded by the FBI as part of his cooperation with the government. Istook did not make any incriminating statements during the call, Albaugh confirmed.
Court has recessed for today. Wise will continue cross-examining Albaugh on Friday morning. The judge, defense and prosecution will meet this afternoon to determine whether two potential witnesses for the defense, David and Laura Ayres, can invoke the Fifth Amendment to avoid testifying. Lawyers for the Department of Justice said last week that they have not named the Ayreses as co-conspirators in the case, but it is possible that they are concerned about self-incrimination in relation to a tax issue.
The prosecution and the presiding judge in the trial of former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring sparred at times over the legal limitations of lobbying today as a former Hill aide outlined the favors he had done for the defendant.
Witness John Albaugh, who served as chief of staff to former Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla., was asked by the prosecution about various contributions given to Istook by Ring, as well as personal gifts -- meals and tickets to concerts and sporting events -- given to Albaugh. In addition to campaign contributions, Ring also helped raise funds for an organization that Istook's wife was involved with, the Congressional Spouses Club.
"This is so indirect. This is just making someone happy," Judge Ellen Huvelle said, contesting the relevance of the prosecution's questions about the fundraising for the club. The prosecution maintained that the fundraising was done with the intent to influence.
A lobbyist can legally make a political contribution to a member of Congress, but personal gifts exceeding $50, or more than $100 total per year from one source, are not allowed. Because Ring made political donations to Istook and organized fundraisers for him, but also allegedly provided personal gifts exceeding the legal limits to the congressman's staffers, Judge Huvelle took extra precautions during Albaugh's testimony to distinguish for the jury between alleged illegal actions and those that were legal or at worse questionable.
In an e-mail to a colleague who had suggested giving Istook tickets to a hockey game, Ring said he thought Istook would be "skittish" about accepting the tickets because the "face value" would be visible on the ticket. The prosecution implied that this meant Ring knew the gift would be outside the legal bounds. Ring said in the e-mail that he would check with Albaugh, but Istook did not take the tickets from Ring.
Continue reading Legal Bounds Of Lobbying Questioned In Trial.
Kevin Ring, an associate of imprisoned former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, was treated with more preference than other lobbyists, said John Albaugh, former chief of staff to former Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla., in testimony today at Ring's trial.
An analysis of highway funding requests in 2003 to the transportation subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, which Istook chaired, revealed that 83 percent of requests lobbied for by Ring were fulfilled, compared to 33 percent of all requests, Albaugh said.
He responded in the positive when asked if he "did things for Ring" that he did not do for any other lobbyists. Albaugh also said that he took action on issues "not based on merit" as a direct result of his relationship with Ring.
Albaugh pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit honest services fraud last year. His testimony is part of his cooperation with the Department of Justice's investigation, and his sentencing is expected in the next few months, said his attorney, Jeffrey Jacobovitz.
Albaugh's testimony will continue this afternoon.
In todays proceedings of the trial of Kevin Ring, associate of imprisoned lobbyist Jack Abramoff, former congressional staffer-turned-lobbyist Neil Volz described Ring as the "COO of Team Abramoff" and the No. 2 lobbyist in the group starting in mid-2002.
Volz also said Ring was "not as close" personally to Abramoff as other lobbyists on their team such as Todd Boulanger, who is expected to testify in the trial next week and pleaded guilty earlier this year for his involvement in the scandal.
Volz responded emotionally to questions about his personal relationship with Ring. The day before Volz pleaded guilty for his involvement in the Abramoff scandal in 2006, the two played basketball. On the day of his plea, Ring brought him dinner, Volz said.
In its cross-examination, the defense asked Volz if the numerous e-mails being used by the prosecution were "bittersweet" jokes, meant to be funny at the time. Volz agreed that he read some elements of the e-mails as jokes at the time they were sent, but believed that phrases like "sugar daddy" that showed up in the e-mails "exemplified" how the lobbying group was doing business, and overall he did not read most of them as jokes.
Volz' testimony, which began on Monday, has now concluded.
The Department of Justice revealed the remainder of its witness list today in the trial of Kevin Ring, a former associate of imprisoned ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
Several anticipated witnesses were not on the list, most notably David Lopez, former chief of staff to Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif., and Greg Orlando, Doolittle's former legislative director. Before becoming a lobbyist, Ring was an aide in Doolittle's office, and in testimony yesterday, another staffer-turned-lobbyist, Neil Volz, characterized Doolittle as one of Ring's lobbying "champions."
Numerous e-mails between the accused and Lopez and Orlando are part of the prosecution's evidence, and the two former Doolittle staffers could have given testimony about Ring's relationship with their office.
The prosecution's witness list is:
John Albaugh, former chief of staff to Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla.
Michael Deaver, Department of Justice
Ann Copland, former staffer for Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss.
Su Daly, Department of Justice
Greg Harris, Department of Justice
Todd Boulanger, former lobbying associate of Ring and Abramoff
Tim Peckinpaugh, former lobbying associate of Ring and Abramoff
Jason Hickox, former vice president of company that owned Abramoff's Signatures Restaurant
The prosecution will also call an FBI agent at the end of its case to read additional e-mails into the record.
A former congressional-staffer-turned-lobbyist called himself a "sugar daddy" as he described the type of lobbying that went on within "Team Abramoff" in today's testimony in the trial of Kevin Ring, an associate of imprisoned lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
"I got calls: 'Let's go drinking.' To me, that meant 'bring the credit card,'" said Neil Volz, a former lobbyist with Ring and Abramoff at Greenberg Traurig and a former chief of staff to former Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, when the prosecution asked him why he described himself as a "sugar daddy" for Ney's office. Volz pleaded guilty in 2006 over his involvement in the Abramoff scandal, and he was sentenced to probation, community service and a fine in exchange for cooperation with prosecutors.
Volz compared the relationship he had with Ney's office to the relationship Ring had with the office of California Republican John Doolittle. Ring was an aide in Doolittle's office before leaving Capitol Hill to become a lobbyist with Abramoff. Volz called Doolittle one of Ring's "champions," just as Ney was his own.
Ring referred to himself as a "sugar daddy" in an e-mail to several Doolittle staffers that was shown to the jury as evidence. The jury has been given several binders full of evidential documents, mostly e-mails between Ring, other lobbyists and public officials or their staffers.
Volz described his lobbying team's practice of giving tickets, meals and drinks to public officials and staffers who were deemed valuable, as well as taking those individuals on trips.
"Really we just wanted to party," Volz said about a trip he took to New Orleans with Ney, former Ney chief of staff Will Heaton, and other lobbyists. He said the group met a client and toured some homes, but those were not the main objectives of the trip, which he described as "part of the corrupt relationship" he had with Ney and his staffers.
Ney resigned and pleaded guilty in 2006. Heaton pleaded guilty in 2007. Ney served 17 months in prison, and Heaton was sentenced to probation, community service and a fine.
Volz described a discussion he had with Ring about "getting the joke," a term used for a lobbyist getting a staffer to prioritize an issue because the lobbyist is "taking care of them," after the Abramoff scandal began to surface in 2004.
"We thought, 'Boy, it would be pretty difficult to defend the idea of getting the joke,'" he said of his conversation with Ring.
Volz also testified about a $2,200 birthday party for Heaton that he expensed to clients of the lobbying firm, calling that type of spending "corrupt." He spoke about the various lunches and dinners for public officials that he paid for and witnessed Ring pay for, and tickets that he and Ring gave to officials to sporting events and concerts.
Henry Schuelke, an external investigator hired by Greenberg Traurig after the scandal emerged, testified this morning.
Volz's testimony will continue in the morning. Following the conclusion of his testimony, John Albaugh, former chief of staff to former Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla., is expected to testify. Albaugh pleaded guilty last year for his involvement in the scandal.
Congress encouraged the lobbying tactics employed by former Jack Abramoff associate Kevin Ring, the defense contended in its opening statement in Ring's trial today.
"You're going to hear about things that should be a crime, but they were not," defense attorney Andrew Wise told the jury. "Kevin Ring played by the rules."
Wise said that the rules encouraged lobbyists to "wine and dine and entertain members of Congress and their staffs," and that though those rules were changed in 2007, the actions taken by Ring between 2000 and 2004, for which he is now on trial, were legal at the time. Not only were they legal, he said, but they were common practice.
"Don't buy into the idea that this was somehow a rogue operation and no one else was doing it," Wise said to the jury.
Continue reading Defense: Ring's Tactics Were Business As Usual.
During opening statements today in the trial of Kevin Ring, a former associate of imprisoned ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff, the prosecution drew a distinction between legal and illegal lobbying, contending that Ring knowingly acted outside the normal bounds of the profession.
"The defendant, Kevin Ring, was a lobbyist in name, but a corrupter in reality," said Nathaniel Edmonds, an attorney for the Department of Justice.
The prosecution's main argument, as outlined today, was that by providing tickets to events like the NCAA basketball tournament and a U2 concert and paying for expensive dinners and drinks, Ring intended to "reward and influence" public officials and their staffs for "official acts" that brought him and his clients millions of dollars worth of business.
Edmonds described legitimate tools of lobbying as influencing with arguments based on policy, political merits, or even campaign contributions, but said that while Ring used those methods, he also sometimes gave "illegal personal gifts."
Ring "did all the things lobbyists do. But he did more," Edmonds said.
Jury selection concluded this morning in the trial of Kevin Ring, a former associate of imprisoned ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Opening statements will begin this afternoon.
Ring is being tried on eight criminal counts, including conspiracy to provide illegal gratuities and commit wire fraud.
Ring served as chief of staff to former Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif., and a Senate Judiciary subcommittee aide to Sen. John Ashcroft, R-Mo., before joining Abramoff's lobbying team at Greenberg Traurig. The Department of Justice charges that while working with Abramoff, Ring was part of an elaborate scheme to bribe public officials and defraud clients, most notably several Native American tribes.
To date, 20 people have been convicted, pleaded guilty or are awaiting trial in relation to the scandal. Abramoff pleaded guilty in January 2006. One congressman (former Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio), other lobbyists, congressional officials and Bush administration officials have also pleaded guilty.
Only one other individual involved in the investigation, former White House aide David Safavian, has gone to trial rather than pleading guilty. He was found guilty of lying and obstructing justice in July 2006.
Two witnesses who are expected to be called by the defense, David and Laura Ayres, have threatened to invoke the Fifth Amendment to avoid testifying. This morning, the presiding judge, Ellen Huvelle, said a hearing will likely be held next week to determine whether the Fifth Amendment applies. Lawyers for the Department of Justice said that they have not named the Ayreses as co-conspirators in the case, but it is possible that they are concerned about self-incrimination in relation to a tax issue.
(Photo of Kevin Ring courtesy of the Senate)
