10-21-08 - Quotes and Clippings US V Stevens

News clipping - October 21, 2008 US v.
Ted Stevens 08-00231 page 1 of 50 pages
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/22/washington/22stevens.html?hp
October 22, 2008
Closing Arguments in Stevens Trial

By NEIL A. LEWIS
WASHINGTON — Government prosecutors and a defense lawyer for Senator Ted Stevens gave
starkly different accounts to a jury Tuesday over whether Mr. Stevens violated ethics laws by not
disclosing tens of thousands of dollars of gifts and services he received.
Joseph Bottini, a federal prosecutor, told the jurors that Mr. Stevens, Republican of Alaska, was well
aware that he received an array of gifts including a sled dog, a sculpture and a massage chair, as well
as the more valuable services of a longtime friend, Bill Allen, who used his company, Veco, to oversee
a big remodeling of Mr. Stevens’s home in Alaska.
“This is a simple case of an elected public official who received hundreds of thousands of dollars in
free benefits and concealed those facts,” Mr. Bottini said.
-- 1 --
News clipping - October 21, 2008 US v. Ted Stevens 08-00231 page 2 of 50 pages
Mr. Stevens is charged in seven felony counts with knowingly failing to list some $250,000 in gifts
and services on Senate disclosure forms.
Mr. Bottini methodically tried to demolish Mr. Stevens’s explanations for not disclosing the gifts and
services. He asserted that Mr. Stevens engaged in a classic cover-up with close and trusted friends to
prevent the public from learning about what he was being given, and to ensure that he would continue
to get free benefits.
Brendan Sullivan, Mr. Stevens’s chief defense lawyer, responded that the government had offered “a
very twisted interpretation of the evidence” in order to prosecute a prominent lawmaker who had
served in the Senate honorably for 40 years.
He said that if the evidence is seen “through a filthy, dirty glass, then the whole world seems dirty.”
Mr. Sullivan, whose style is renowned enough to have filled the courtroom with fellow lawyers to
witness his performance, proved much the showman. As he railed against the government, he paced
the courtroom, sometimes bent over to embrace the lectern, put both hands to the side of his head as if
the charges were too painful to bear, and waved his arms incessantly.
In the lawyer’s telling, Mr. Stevens was the unwilling recipient of many of the gifts that Mr. Allen
provided without his knowledge. And, he said, the Senator’s wife, Catherine Stevens, was really in
charge of the renovation project, and had paid some $160,000 in bills believing that they accounted for
the entire project.
The prosecution’s case is “crazy,” Mr. Sullivan said. “They’re trying to convict an innocent man by
submitting to this courtroom evidence that is so far from real life it should make you sick.”
The jurors showed little emotion during either presentation. They were matched in their impassivity by
Mr. Stevens, who sat glumly at the defense table.
The jury will begin its deliberations on Wednesday.
Although closing arguments can have an influence on jurors, the impression they made of Mr. Stevens
himself during his three days testifying on his own behalf concluding Monday might weigh more
heavily. The issue will be whether the jury regarded Mr. Stevens, who openly displayed his temper, as
a disagreeable and crotchety elderly man caught in wrongdoing, or as a veteran public servant
appropriately indignant at having his integrity questioned.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/22/washington/22stevens.html?hp
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-stevens22-2008oct22,0,4038116.story
-- 2 --
Sen. Ted Stevens covered up gift-taking, prosecutor says

Items from Stevens' oilman friend came at the right price -- free -- the government alleges in his
corruption trial. The Alaska senator's lawyers say he's the innocent victim of overzealous charges.
By Richard B. Schmitt, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
11:38 AM PDT, October 21, 2008
Reporting from Washington -- Sen. Ted Stevens repeatedly turned to oilman Bill J. Allen for items he
wanted, from a generator to a new bed for his wife, because "the price is always right when you know
it is free," a government attorney asserted today.
Prosecutor Joseph Bottini, in a closing statement to the jury at Stevens' corruption trial, said that the
Alsaka Republican repeatedly made up false stories to cover up the things of value he got from Allen,
once head of the state's largest private employer, because he knew that public disclosure of the items
would be embarrassing and possibly damaging to him.
"Ted Stevens had a good friend, and his name was Bill Allen," Bottini said. "He knew Bill Allen
would give . . . and he was perfectly willing to receive."
Bottini said that Stevens also knew that Allen and others "were trusted associates and would cover for
him," fabricating stories in e-mails and other documents that were designed to conceal the truth.
Stevens is charged with failing to report more than $250,000 in gifts and home improvements in
violation of Senate financial disclosure rules. Most of the gifts and improvements allegedly came from
Allen. Juror deliberations in the case are expected to begin Wednesday.
-- 3 --
Stevens' lawyer, Brendan V. Sullivan, in his closing remarks, said that Stevens was being victimized
by an overzealous prosecution.
"We are trying to convict an innocent man in this courtroom on an interpretation of evidence that is so
far from real life that it should make you sick," Sullivan told the jury. He urged the jurors to accept at
face value statements Stevens had made in e-mails and other correspondence when the gifts and home
improvements were made, and not ascribe ulterior motives to them after the fact.
"If you look at life through a filthy

dirty glass that doesn't get washed " If you look at life through a
for five or 10 years, then the whole
world looks dirty," Sullivan said.
filthy dirty glass that doesn't
"You've heard evidence that this is a get washed for five or 10 years,
very decent man. Would he be
involved in a conspiracy in 2000 and
then the whole world looks
2001, year after year covering it up? dirty," Sullivan said. "You've
To believe the government, you
would have to ignore the written
heard evidence that this is a
record." very decent man. Would he be
The government case, he said, rests
involved in a conspiracy in
on the notion that Stevens "must 2000 and 2001, year after year
stay awake all night long thinking covering it up? To believe the
about what to say in these letters and
whether it is going to look good government, you would have to
eight years out." ignore the written record. "
The government has charged that Stevens accepted a series of gifts, including a gas grill, bronze art
work, a generator and hand-crafted stained-glass, along with more than $100,000 in free labor on a
makeover of his home in Girdwood, Alaska.
Sullivan, in his remarks, cited appraisals of the home after the renovation, suggesting that the
Stevenses actually overpaid for the renovation even based on those bills they paid.
"Do you have any evidence he cares about a grill or a fish sculpture or the rest of that stuff?" Sullivan
said. "Just because it is foisted upon you doesn't mean you have to take it."
Sullivan said the intent of the disclosure rules Stevens is accused of violating is to ensure that the
judgment of lawmakers is not unduly influenced, but that the government was trying to "dirty him up"
by innuendo even though there was no evidence of improper influence.
Stevens testified that even though the items were delivered to and remained at his home, he did not
consider them to belong to him. His wife, Catherine, testified that she paid more than $160,000 in bills
on the renovation. She said she paid every bill she ever received for the project, although she and
Stevens both conceded that Allen may have withheld some bills.
Bottini, the prosecutor, said Stevens' explanation for the gifts was implausible. He said that the
Stevenses paid some of the bills only because they were owed to people whom they did not know well
and who could not be relied upon to withhold bills.
-- 4 --
"Why would he ask Bill Allen and Veco to be involved in this home renovation?" Bottini said,
referring to the oil firm that Allen once ran.
"They were the most improbable home contractor around," the prosecutor said. Stevens "knew his
friend Bill Allen was wealthy and generous," was "willing to cover for him," and "knew how the price
was right," Bottini said.
Bottini buttressed his case with a secretly recorded phone conversation involving a neighbor of Stevens
in Girdwood, Bob Persons, in which Persons said that Stevens gets "hysterical when he has to spend
money out of his own pocket."
Stevens and his wife have said that while some Veco employees may have worked on the renovation,
they were moonlighting for a general contractor whom the Stevenses said they always paid.
Bottini said the Stevenses turned a blind eye to the work of the Veco employees, and the prosecutor
identified 19 people from the company who had worked on the renovation, as the names of the workers
popped up on a video screen in the court room, one by one.
Concluding his morning remarks, Bottini played a phone conversation between Stevens and Allen in
which Stevens raised the possibility of having to do jail time.
"Who talks about spending a little time in jail unless they have done something wrong?" Bottini said.
Sullivan is set to complete his closing argument after lunch; the government will then have the
opportunity to respond.
U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan said he would instruct the jury Wednesday, after which it
would begin deliberating Stevens' fate.
Schmitt is a Times staff writer.
rick.schmitt@latimes.com
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-stevens22-2008oct22,0,4038116.story
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5je6Pw1sViz24JRo9F0PNhoqMtzTwD93UTUFO0
Prosecutors: Ted Stevens had generous friends

By MATT APUZZO and JESSE J. HOLLAND –October 21, 2008
WASHINGTON (AP) — Prosecutors say Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens surrounded himself with friends
who lavished gifts upon him and trusted him to keep quiet about it.
Prosecutor Joseph Bottini is delivering closing arguments in Stevens' corruption trial. Closings are
expected to continue through most of Tuesday. Jurors are to begin deliberating Wednesday.
-- 5 --
Stevens is charged with lying for years on Senate financial documents to conceal $250,000 in home
renovations and other gifts he received from oil services contractor VECO Corp.
Stevens has steadfastly maintained his innocence and asked for an unusually speedy trial, which he
hopes will clear him before Election Day. He says he paid every bill he received for the renovations
and didn't know he got any freebies.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story
is below.
WASHINGTON (AP) — After two years under FBI scrutiny, a month on trial and three days on the
witness stand, Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens is about out of time to convince jurors of his innocence.
A lot is riding on Tuesday's closing arguments: the reputation of the Senate's longest-serving
Republican, the legacy of Alaska's political patriarch and perhaps the outcome of his close re-election
fight.
Stevens, 84, is charged with lying on Senate financial documents for years to conceal $250,000 in
home renovations and other gifts he received from oil services contractor VECO Corp. Stevens has
steadfastly maintained his innocence and asked for an unusually speedy trial, which he hopes will clear
him before Election Day.
Neither Stevens nor the Justice Department has emerged from the trial unblemished. Stevens appeared
cantankerous at times on the witness stand as he sought to explain one apparent freebie after another.
Prosecutors, meanwhile, were repeatedly chastised for withholding evidence or otherwise manipulating
the case against Stevens.
The heart of the case is a complicated home renovation project, in which Stevens' small A-frame house
was jacked up on stilts. A new first floor was built, complete with a wine cellar and sauna, and two
wraparound porches added.
Prosecutors say Stevens relied on VECO Corp. employees to do the construction, knowing he'd get lots
of free work.
Stevens says he relied on his friend, VECO founder Bill Allen, to oversee the project. Stevens says
Allen was under strict orders to relay every bill for the job. If Allen covered some of those bills
himself, the senator says, he didn't know about it.
During closing arguments, both sides are expected to return to the themes of their case.
Defense attorneys can remind jurors of Stevens' storied career and solid reputation in the Senate. If
Stevens wanted to accept free home renovations, they say, why would he and his wife have paid
$160,000 for the project? Why would he send repeated requests for bills?
Prosecutors will probably tell jurors that Stevens got so much free stuff, he simply must have known
about it. Those notes requesting invoices, the government says, were part of a ruse.
-- 6 --
In Alaska, meanwhile, Democrat Mark Begich has sought to capitalize on Stevens' legal woes.
Democrats are running a flurry of campaign ads highlighting the trial. One features excerpt from a
secret FBI recording. Another features actors playing FBI agents listening in on Stevens' phone calls.
Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5je6Pw1sViz24JRo9F0PNhoqMtzTwD93UTUFO0
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/08/stevens.trial/index.html#cnnSTCText?iref=werecommend
From Paul Courson

CNN
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A federal judge again declined to declare a mistrial or throw out charges in
the corruption case against Sen. Ted Stevens on Wednesday, despite the defense's claims of
prosecutorial misconduct.
-- 7 --
Sen. Ted Stevens did not disclose to the U.S. Senate work done on his Alaska home, prosecutors say.
However, U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said some evidence will be stricken from the record and
jurors will not be allowed to consider it.
Lawyers for Stevens, R-Alaska, alleged that prosecutors concealed information that would have helped
them defend the senator. Stevens is accused of failing to disclose in Senate finance reports more than
$250,000 in gifts, most of which involved renovations to his Alaska chalet.
Sullivan began hearing arguments on the defense's motions seeking the mistrial declaration or charge
dismissals on Wednesday afternoon, after the prosecution wound down its case.
But Sullivan ruled that the trial will proceed. Stevens' attorneys say they plan to call former Secretary
of State Colin Powell as a witness on the first day of their case.
The 84-year-old Stevens, the longest-serving senator in Congress, is seeking a seventh full term in
November.
Some of the defense's allegations of prosecutorial misconduct relate to documentation of a swap of two
vehicles between Stevens and Bill Allen, owner of Veco Corp.
Don't Miss
 Judge accuses lawyer of signaling to client

 Jury hears Stevens curse on wiretapped call
 Judge declines to dismiss charges against Stevens
 Star witness takes stand in Stevens trial
Prosecutors call the swap a "sweetheart deal." It was already known that Allen agreed to swap his new
1999 Land Rover for Stevens' collectible 1964½ Mustang convertible. Stevens gave Allen the car plus
$5,000 to seal the deal, according to the indictment.
Prosecutors have disputed the value of the Mustang, portraying the difference as among the "gifts"
Stevens was required to report.
-- 8 --
But defense attorneys, cross-examining Allen over the past two days, came up with dealer and factory
materials suggesting that the invoice price of the Land Rover was $37,500, far less than the $44,000
prosecutors claimed was paid.
Allen said that he couldn't remember what he paid for the Land Rover but that "they probably stuck it
to me."
When prosecutors followed up, they produced a bank check with Allen's signature for $44,339.51.
Stevens' defense attorneys say prosecutors were required to disclose that check before the trial began.
"We did not produce a copy of the check as we never intended to introduce it," federal Prosecutor Joe
Bottini wrote in an e-mail the defense filed with other documents early Wednesday. "We were
surprised by the introduction of the Land Rover corporate exhibits that you introduced."
Stevens attorney Rob Cary wrote, "The government's failure to disclose this piece of evidence is
especially offensive."
Cary cited what he called "a pattern of failing to abide by the orders of this court, constitutional
mandates and the Federal Rules of
Criminal Procedure." Cary cited what he called "a
The defense also filed motions to
pattern of failing to abide by the
dismiss the charges last week, alleging orders of this court, constitutional
that the prosecution withheld evidence mandates and the Federal Rules of
relating to renovations of Stevens' chalet Criminal Procedure.”
in Girdwood, Alaska. Allen's company
did most of the renovations. Cary cited what he called "a
The information included an FBI
pattern of failing to abide by the
investigator's report that Allen said orders of this court, constitutional
showed Stevens would have paid his mandates and the Federal Rules of
bills had he known about them. Criminal Procedure."
"We were entitled to that information "We were entitled to that
before we started the case," Cary said information before we started the
last week.
case," Cary said last week.
Sullivan rejected the defense's motions
last week, as he did Wednesday, and allowed the trial to proceed. However, he said he suspected that
the prosecutions' late disclosure may have been deliberate, describing it as an apparent attempt to "hide
the ball."
Allen has been the government's star witness as part of a deal for his guilty plea in a case involving
attempted bribery of Alaska state lawmakers.
But Allen, when cross-examined by defense attorneys, testified that he didn't bill Stevens for some of
the work done on the senator's home.
-- 9 --
Lead defense attorney Brendan Sullivan, who is not related to the judge, told the jury during opening
statements that Stevens could not report a gift he didn't know about.
When Brendan Sullivan asked Allen why he failed to bill for all of the work, Allen testified that he
thought his Veco workers had overcharged for the job and that he could not come up with a fair price.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/08/stevens.trial/index.html#cnnSTCText?iref=werecommend
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/washingtonpostinvestigations/2008/10/now_that_the_corruption_tria
l.html
-- 10 --
Testimony in the corruption trial of Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens has wrapped up, and closing statements
and jury deliberation are scheduled for the next two days.
The three-week trial featured a number of star witnesses, including wealthy oil executive Bill Allen,
Stevens's one-time friend; several character witnesses, including former Secretary of State Colin
Powell, Sens. Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah); Stevens's wife, Catherine
Stevens; and, of course, Stevens himself.
Here's a collection of the most memorable and notable quotes from

the trial:
SEN. TED STEVENS
"I'm not going to get into a numbers game -- you tell me what year
you're asking about."
— Stevens, after lead government prosecutor Brenda K. Morris

asked him when he found out Allen had provided a new deck for his
Alaska "chalet"
"That's just an absolute lie."
— Stevens, in response to testimony from Allen that Stevens was

asking about construction invoices to protect himself
"My bottom wasn't bare."
— Stevens, after he was asked if the e-mails he sent regarding bills

from contractors were really just "covering your bottom"
"He bought that chair as a gift, but I refused it as a gift. He put it there
and said it was my chair. I told him I would not accept it as a gift. We
have lots of things in our house that don't belong to us."
— Stevens, answering questions about a chair he received from Allen
"VECO is not Bill Allen to me. Bill Allen is not VECO. You're the one
bringing VECO in here. Bill Allen is my friend."
-- 11 --
— Stevens, answering questions about furniture he received from
Allen
"The worst that can happen to us is we run up a bunch of legal fees,

and might lose and we might have to pay a fine, might have to serve
some time in jail. I hope to Christ it never gets to that...I don't think
we have done anything wrong."
— Stevens, speaking to Allen in a secretly-recorded phone call in

October 2006 that was played for jurors
STEVENS'S FRIENDS
"No. That's crazy."
— Stevens's friend, Bob Persons, in response to whether he told

Allen that home renovation bills for Stevens were just a "cover"
"If he gives you his word, he'll keep it. He's totally honest."
— Hatch, referring to Stevens
"He was someone whose word you could rely on. As we say in the
infantry, this is a guy you take on a long patrol."
— Powell, referring to Stevens
"I can assure you his word is good enough to take to the bank."
— Inouye, referring to Stevens
STEVENS'S ATTORNEYS
"The evidence will demonstrate that you are dealing here with a man
who is honest and would not have intentionally violated the law."
— Stevens's lead attorney, Brendan V. Sullivan Jr., in his opening

statement
-- 12 --
"This is a criminal case with a career on the line here. The government
has responsibilities. Time and time again, they have not lived up to
them. Enough is enough."
— one of Stevens's defense attorneys, Robert Carey, referring to

allegations that government prosecutors purposely withheld evidence
that was favorable to Stevens. The judge denied several attempts to
dismiss the case in light of the withheld evidence.
"When it comes to things around the tepee, the wife controls."
— Stevens's attorney, Sullivan, referring to Catherine Stevens and how

she handled the home renovations
GOVERNMENT WITNESSES
"I was shocked. I knew I was in a bind because I knew I couldn't really
do anything."
— contractor Augie Paone, referring to an alleged conversation with

Allen, in which he told Paone to "eat" Stevens's bill
"I was concerned that the senator wasn't getting billed for some of
that stuff, and I was concerned something like this might happen."
— Paone, referring to the senator's corruption trial
"We really liked each other. Ted loved Alaska, and I loved Alaska. We
liked to go fishing."
— Allen
PROSECUTORS
"You were the lion of the Senate, and yet you didn't know how to stop
a man from putting big-ticket items in your home?"
— Morris, speaking to Stevens
-- 13 --
"We reach for the Yellow Pages. He reached for Veco."
— Morris, referring to Stevens's frequent calls to Allen for home

repairs and fix-ups.
"This is a case about a public official who took hundreds of thousands

of dollars' worth of free financial benefits and then took away the
public's right to know the information."
— Morris, referring to Stevens
THE JUDGE
"Something smells here."
— U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, referring to two pieces of

evidence that he said were tainted by prosecutors' bungling
"He's fortunate he went out that door and not the back door
with the marshals."
— Sullivan, referring to Allen's lawyer, Robert Bundy, who

was accused of making "secret signals" to his client on the
stand
By Derek Kravitz | October 21, 2008; 7:30 AM ET Stevens Trial
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/washingtonpostinvestigations/2008/10/now_that_the_corruption_tria
l.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2008/10/21/AR2008102101624.html?hpid=topnews
Prosecutor Says Sen. Stevens's Explanations Are 'Nonsense'

By Del Quentin Wilber
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 21, 2008; 3:46 PM
-- 14 --
The explanations of Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) for why he did not report tens of thousands of dollars
in gifts and home renovations on financial disclosure forms are "nonsense," a federal prosecutor told
jurors today in the lawmaker's corruption trial.
Prosecutor Joseph Bottini said Stevens turned to an oil field services firm to do renovations on his
Alaska home in 2000 because he wanted to keep costs down.
"The price is always right when it's free," Bottini said in closing arguments.
Stevens, one of the most powerful Republicans in the Senate, is charged with lying on financial
disclosure forms to hide more than $250,000 in gifts and renovations to his Alaska home from 1999
through 2006. Prosecutors allege that an oil services company, Veco, and its chief executive, Bill
Allen, paid for many of the gifts and most of the work.
"He was happy with Veco doing this even though they were the most improbable home contractor
around," Bottini said. "He knew Bill Allen was wealthy. He knew Bill Allen was generous. . . . This
case is about an elected public official who made a conscious decision to hide the fact he was receiving
substantial financial benefits."
Stevens's attorney, Brendan Sullivan, countered that the prosecution had indicted an innocent man and
viewed the world through "dirty glass" that makes the "whole world look dirty."
"They are trying to convict an innocent man on the interpretation of evidence that is so far from real
life that it would make you sick," Sullivan said.
Sullivan and prosecutors sparred today in closing arguments over the meaning of much of the evidence
presented to jurors in the month-long trial. Sullivan is expected to continue his closing arguments into
the afternoon, and prosecutors will be offered another opportunity to speak.
Jurors will get the case tomorrow. Stevens, 84, was indicted in July and requested a speedy trial in
hopes of clearing his name before the November elections. He is running for a seventh full term.
Prosecutors allege that Stevens wanted to keep costs down and turned to Allen for help. Allen and
Veco workers have testified in great detail about how they helped double the size of the house, which
Stevens called the "chalet," between 2000 and 2002 by adding a new first floor, two wrap-around
decks and a garage. A number of e-mails were introduced showing that Stevens was kept updated on
the work's progress by a friend who lived in town. In those e-mails, the neighbor lauded the work of
Allen and one of his employees.
But Sullivan countered that those e-mails do not mention Veco and show only that the senator was
keeping track of the work and relying on friends 3,300 miles away. Sullivan repeatedly returned to a
letter that Stevens wrote to Allen in 2002 in which he thanked him for work on the house and asked
him for a bill. Stevens wrote the note shortly after learning that Allen had decided, on his own, to add a
new first-floor deck, Sullivan said.
The defense lawyer argued that the note was "at the heart of the case," saying that Stevens was
earnestly trying to get invoices. "If you believe the government's version of the evidence, he is a
mastermind of conspiracy," Sullivan said.
-- 15 --
Bottini said the note only proved that Stevens was trying to create a paper trail to avoid trouble down
the road. Stevens never paid Allen or Veco for any of the work on the house.
Sullivan argued that Stevens paid every bill his family received. He noted that the senator and his wife
wrote $162,000 in checks for the remodeling work by contractors. Most of that money was paid to a
residential construction firm that was brought onto the job by Allen. Stevens and his wife, Catherine,
testified they thought that contractor was in charge of the project.
He then showed jurors tax records that showed the house grew in value by $104,000 during the
renovation period, evidence that he said proved the Stevenses thought they had paid a fair-market price
for the job.
Sullivan also attacked the credibility of Allen, who has pleaded guilty to federal bribery charges in a
wide-ranging probe of corruption in Alaska politics. He said Stevens turned to Allen, a close friend, to
help him keep track of the project and line up workers.
Allen testified that a mutual friend told him to ignore Stevens's requests for bills because the senator
was just "covering" himself. Sullivan said Allen lied to protect himself and was testifying in the hope
of protecting his family and company, which was sold to another firm.
Bottini said Allen was a believable witness. He also hammered at Stevens

for not removing gifts -- including furniture, a generator, steel stairs, the
deck or a $2,700 massage chair -- from his home.
"Does anyone really believe he thought that chair was a loan?" Bottini
asked, referring to a Brookstone massage lounger that was given to
Stevens in 2001 by a friend and that remains in the senator's basement.
"What were the terms of this loan? Zero percent interest for 84
months?"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2008/10/21/AR2008102101624.html?hpid=topnews
http://www.abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=6080937&page=1
Sen. Ted Stevens' lead defense attorney blasted the government's case against the Alaska Republican,
saying its efforts were a "twisted interpretation of the evidence" against "an innocent man."
-- 16 --
Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, and his daughter Beth Stevens, arrive at U.S. District Court in
Washington today as his trial on corruption charges prepares to go to the jury.
(J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo)
Brendan Sullivan Jr., who has a record of having very few clients face conviction by a jury, argued on
behalf of Stevens who is accused of hiding $250,000 worth of home renovation costs and other gifts by
omitting them on financial disclosure forms required by the U.S. Senate. Stevens, the longest-serving
GOP senator, is up for re-election in November.
The prosecution claimed in court that the main supplier of the gifts was Bill Allen, the ex-CEO of
shuttered oil services firm Veco. The defense countered that the Stevens family paid $160,000 for the
renovation project carried out at their Girdwood, Alaska, home.
Sullivan concluded his closing argument by noting the letters that Stevens sent to Allen in 2002. In one
of them, Stevens asked Allen for a bill. "You owe me a bill ... remember Torricelli, my friend,"
Stevens wrote, in reference to former Sen. Robert Torricelli, who was ousted from the U.S. Senate
amid an ethics investigation. "Friendship is one thing Congressional ... ethics rules entirely different."
Sullivan also claimed that Allen hid the bills from the Stevens.
Sullivan also pleaded with the jury to consider the character witness testimony from Sen. Daniel
Inouye, D-Hawaii, and former Secretary of State Colin Powell. "Are you going to believe Daniel
Inouye or Bill Allen?" Sullivan asked.
"If your conscience says not guilty, then it is your duty to say no," Sullivan added. "You have the
power to do what's right ... I ask you to return seven not guilty verdicts."
Countering Sullivan's closing argument, lead prosecutor Brenda Morris exclaimed, "Wow! Were we at
the same trial?
"No one is above the law ... not a teacher, not a lawyer, not a sitting United States senator." Morris
asserted that, over the years, the evidence showed that Stevens was engaged in a pattern and practice of
filing false and misleading financial disclosure forms.
In her closing, Morris chipped away at the defense, telling the jury, "The defendant's own witnesses
contradicted each other. In an effort to undercut the defense argument that Stevens' wife handled all of
the finances and paid all the bills relating to the home renovation," Morris told the jury of 11 women
-- 17 --
and 5 men, "That woman, Catherine Stevens, is still recovering from the bus he threw her under ... she
is trying to cover for her husband."
Related
Stevens Grilled About Gifts, Renovations
Powell Endorsement Reaches Stevens Trial
On Stand, Stevens Flashes Temper
Morris then launched into a series of anecdotes about Stevens' alleged receipt of gifts. Morris
recounted for the jury what one co-worker told her. "He lives so close to the North Pole that maybe
Santa and his elves came and did the work ... he had no idea he had been very, very good."
Morris added, "It's not about the final number, it's that he knew he got the deck, he knew he didn't pay
for it and he knew he didn't report it."
Morris continued hammering away at Stevens and his friends, former Veco CEO Allen and another
friend, Bob Persons, playing for the jury an FBI intercepted phone conversation where Allen and
Persons discuss covering up invoices that noted "Labor paid by Bill."
On the tapes, Persons says to Allen, "We don't need this thing floating around ... We need to get the
guy at Chugach Sewer & Drain to make that disappear from his records."
Through the hour and twenty-minute verbal assault, Stevens sank deeper into his chair, and, at one
point, held his hands together like he was praying.
Morris then told the jury they should discount the character witness testimony, saying the defense
thought, "Maybe the big name witnesses would sway you ... He's not going to commit crime with
Colin Powell." Top of Form
-- 18 --
Saying that politicians always keep their guard up and have public personas they convey, Morris told
the jurors, "None of the character witnesses know the private Ted Stevens ... Ladies and gentlemen,
you know the real Ted Stevens.
"Behind all that growling and all those snappy comebacks and all that righteous indignations, he's just
a man ... Find him guilty of scheming and filing false disclosure forms ... It's your job," Morris
concluded.
Earlier in the day, Morris' colleague Joseph Bottini methodically laid out the government's case.
Laying out a series of gifts that Stevens has allegedly received over the years but has failed to disclose,
Bottini told the jury, "The price is always right when it is free."
Bottini said that the evidence presented in the case showed that Allen showered Stevens with benefits
that extended far beyond renovations on Stevens' home where 20 Veco employees worked.
The prosecution has highlighted a $2,700 massage chair, a $29,000 fish statue and the $1,000 price tag
of a sled dog puppy purchased at a charity event to show that Stevens failed to report many things from
2000 to 2006.
"There are gifts that should have been reported, and he knows it," Bottini said.
Bottini said of Stevens, he was trying to "cover and conceal things. ... If he was willing to cover up and
devise small things like his dog ... what does it tell you about what he may want to do with the
renovations of his home."
Concerning the addition of a $6,000 generator to the home in preparation for Y2K, Bottini said Stevens
had "great difficulty explaining it away ... he knew if he was going to ask for a generator, he was going
to get one."
Stevens testified at the trial that he instructed Allen to get him a small pull-cord generator in
preparations for power outages associated with Y2K, but his friend installed a permanent unit on his
Girdwood, Alaska, home. The government alleges that Stevens never claimed the item on his financial
disclosure forms. "The defendant says he doesn't want it ... but it's still there."
The prosecutor noted almost a dozen times that it was sheer "nonsense" that Stevens was unable to stop
Allen and his generosity.
"Does anyone believe he could get rid of the stuff he received?" Bottini asked. "It was his obligation to
report this."
Emphasizing that the case was about the senator accurately filing his U.S. Senate financial disclosure
forms, the prosecution summarized its evidence and told the jury that Stevens showed disdain for the
reporting requirements in a 2004 e-mail to his friend. "In connection with this GD [goddamn]
disclosure form," the document noted.
Listing all of the Veco employees that worked on the home, Bottini said Veco had to get Christiansen
Builders, the main general contractor that the Stevens had paid, to do the work because it didn't
normally build homes.
-- 19 --
While the defense has tried to portray that Allen, the Veco CEO, and Stevens were close friends, the
prosecutor said that Veco was, "the most improbable home contractor around." Bottini noted that while
both Stevens and his wife were attorneys, they never had a contract for the work on their home, and
they both seemed fine with having a Veco architect draw the blueprints for the home.
The prosecution's strongest evidence appeared to be the playing of Stevens' own voice on FBI
surveillance tapes saying, "These guys can't really hurt us. You know, they're not going shoot us. It's
not Iraq. What the hell? The worst that can be done, the worst that can happen to us is we round up a
bunch of legal fees and, and might lose and we might have to pay a fine, might have to serve a little
time in jail."
Bottini said to the jury, "Who talks about doing a little time in jail if they didn't do anything wrong?"
When Sullivan rose to speak and plead his case before the jurors, he said the FBI tapes show in full
context that Stevens and Allen were talking about campaign contributions. Sullivan noted that Allen
was a convicted felon, "a paid witness ... trying to get his $70 million holdout." Sullivan said in
reference to possible inducements that Allen could get from his sale of Veco to the global engineering
firm CH2M Hill. "How can you sleep on verdict night?" Sullivan dramatically said before the jurors.
Sullivan then showed the jurors the numerous checks Ted and Catherine Stevens submitted for
payments to their home, which totaled about $160,000. "You can see the innocence in the documents.
... They paid $160,000."
Sullivan said the prosecutors don't understand Stevens' frame of mind. "The government is being
Monday morning quarterback six and seven years out," he said. Sullivan said at the time that Stevens
had no idea his friend Allen would become enmeshed in a wide-ranging political scandal in Alaska.
"His friend was Bill Allen ... it was Bill Allen not Veco that used the chalet. ... It wasn't Veco that
pleaded guilty and was convicted."
Sullivan made sure to say Allen "pleaded guilty to campaign violations, none of which involved Ted
Stevens."
Perhaps the defense succeeded in casting some reasonable doubt on the

prosecution's case: One female juror was seen nodding her head during Sullivan's
closing argument as the check flashed before the jury showing payments for the
house.
The government will make a brief rebuttal this afternoon.
Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures
http://www.abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=6080937&page=1
-- 20 --
http://alaskacorruption.blogspot.com/
Monday, October 20, 2008

Last Chance: More on the Defense's Likely Closing Argument
Live from the Ted Stevens Trial, between Day 19 and Day 20
Washington, D.C.—
In addition to what this blog has already predicted regarding the closings, two points stand out as
probable for the defense in the final argument tomorrow:
1. Where’s Rocky?
Lead defense lawyer Brendan Sullivan is sure to point out that much of the prosecution’s case rests on
the work Rocky Williams provided in the remodeling of the Stevens chalet—work that Williams did
on the VECO payroll that the Stevenses never paid for.
But due to either his illness or a questionable decision by the prosecution, Williams never testified at
the trial. Sullivan will cite that non-testimony as a failure of the prosecution’s proof. The jury can only
convict Stevens if it finds him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and Stevens’ lawyer will argue that
the government’s failure to produce Williams creates reasonable doubt all by itself.
2. Nullify this Mouse
Sullivan will have to be careful with this argument, but the wily attorney will probably find some way
to suggest that in bringing these charges of non-disclosure that the government has spent too much
money chasing too small a case. If the prosecution could prove bribery or the acceptance of illegal
gratuities, Sullivan could hint, the prosecution should have done so. Instead, Sullivan may suggest, the
government has brought a Mickey Mouse case which amounts at worst to mistaken paperwork over
such things as the value of a dog. Sullivan would want the jury to think that these allegations should be
in front of the Senate Ethics Committee, not a jury in a criminal trial. For Stevens’ attorney, it would
be great if the jury decided that no matter what the law says, the jury should nullify the law by refusing
to convict based on what he would portray as at most paperwork screw-ups by a very busy and
dedicated public servant.
Posted by Cliff Groh at 9:30 PM 0 comments
Labels: Ted Stevens Trial
It's a Sad Song, and the Music Hurts More than the Lyrics
Live from the Ted Stevens Trial, Day 19
Washington, D.C.--
Ted Stevens finished his testimony today, and both the defense and the government have rested their
cases.
Today was less fiery than last Friday’s beginning of the cross-examination, but it was probably more
damaging to Stevens.
-- 21 --
http://alaskacorruption.blogspot.com/ CTD.
Chief prosecutor Brenda Morris today mostly focused on using precise questions to get Stevens to
admit unfavorable facts as opposed to trying to get him to adopt unflattering characterizations of his
behavior.
The Furniture Bill Allen Deposited in Stevens’ Girdwood Home
She started this morning with the single most specific and human vignette in the trial: The moment in
2001 when Stevens and his wife Catherine came to their Girdwood home and discovered that their
furniture is gone and replaced with furniture that Bill Allen has brought in.
Morris gets Stevens to repeat what he and his wife have already said before in the trial—they were
unhappy because the furniture the long-time VECO chief has brought in is ugly, old, inappropriate for
the chalet, and in at least one case has cigarette holes.
The prosecutor then pointed out that Stevens not only kept the furniture in his home, four years after it
arrived he even discussed the possibility of giving it to his son and daughter-in-law.
“You are actually trying to re-gift the furniture that is so hideous to your son. Is that correct?”
Stevens denied that what he considering was re-gifting, because he did not see the furniture as a gift in
the first place and never owned it. He acknowledged that the furniture that Allen deposited in his home
in 2001 is still there.
The prosecutor pounced later when Stevens volunteered that “Bill Allen stole our furniture and put his
in the chalet.” Morris responded by asking the Senator why he didn’t call the police.
“It never crossed my mind to call the police at that time,” Stevens said. “I might now.”
In its closing argument tomorrow, the prosecution will surely point out that the Senator went with
Allen on their vacation-style Boot Camps for years even after the oil-services tycoon committed this
alleged theft.
The Big Generator Bill Allen Bought for Stevens’ Chalet
The prosecution put Stevens in another difficult place by making him walk through the story of how
Allen arranged the installation at the chalet of a big back-up generator that Stevens never paid for.
In 1999, Stevens e-mailed his friend Bob Penney and told him “I asked Bill Allen to hook up a
generator to our chalet for Y2K—JUST IN CASE!” Allen had a big generator with a transfer switch
put in at the house that is there today.
Stevens testified on cross-examination that this was another example of Bill Allen going overboard.
The Senator said that he had asked Bill Allen to arrange for the rental of a small generator just to
handle any potential problem the Y2K threat could cause for the New Year, but Allen had instead
bought a big one. Stevens said that he had asked Allen to remove it, and that one problem Stevens had
in making this request was that the Senator was in Girdwood so little he didn’t see for a substantial
period that it was still there.
The Role of Allen and VECO in the Chalet’s Renovation

-- 22 --
The questions about Allen and VECO that hurt Stevens the most this morning, however, came when
Morris walked the Senator through a series of e-mails that Stevens’ friend Bob Persons sent the
Senator in 2000 during the renovations of Stevens’ chalet. Stevens had designated Persons as his “eyes
and ears” on the ground in Girdwood while the Senator labored back in Washington, D.C. An essential
element of Stevens’ defense is that the Senator and his wife understood that two VECO employees—
Rocky Williams and Dave Anderson—who worked extensively on the renovation and billed VECO for
their time were instead working for a construction company run by Augie Paone, whose bills the
Stevenses paid when the invoices arrived.
The problem is that more than a half-dozen e-mailed progress reports Persons sent Stevens in the
summer and fall of 2000 describe the work of Williams, Anderson, and Allen in often glowing terms,
but do not mention Paone or his company. Stevens was forced to acknowledge that Williams often
worked for VECO, but insisted that he appeared to work for Paone’s company while working on
Stevens’ remodeling job.
The prosecutor scored again by getting Stevens to admit that he had stated in a 1997 letter that he had
thought about raising the chalet to add a story to the home, but “I just have not had the cash to do that.”
Morris got Stevens to concede that he had begun the raising project—and then went on to even more
extensive renovations—after he discussed with Bill Allen and Bob Persons in 1999 his desires to
expand his home and his two friends volunteered their help.
Morris suggested that Allen’s association with Stevens seemed to make Stevens feel able to renovate
his home. Given that the announcement of the federal investigation into Stevens’ home renovation in
2006 caused Allen to leave Stevens’ circle of friends, Morris suggested similarly that Allen’s break
with Stevens led the Senator to stop taking care of the Girdwood home since he no longer had his rich
friend’s assistance.
The Status of the Massage Chair in Stevens’ Home in Washington, D.C.
Questioning on the $2,700 Brookstone massage chair Persons put in Stevens’ home in Washington,
D.C. in 2001 also gained ground for the government. Stevens said that while his friend Persons
intended the chair as a gift, the Senator would not accept it as a gift. Instead, Stevens considers the
chair as a loan—even though the chair is still in his home seven years later.
Morris asked Stevens if he had other furniture in this home owned by other people.
“We have lots of furniture in our house that doesn’t belong to us,” the Senator replied.
The Emotions in the Courtroom
Jurors, particularly the younger members of the panel, showed a number of smiles today during this
morning’s cross-examination. It appeared that Friday they enjoyed the combat between the feisty
Senator and the peppery prosecutor; today it seemed more that the jurors were savoring what they
evidently perceived as the unintentional humor in some of Stevens’ statements.
Morris was better in exercising control of Stevens today, and that control created a mood and
momentum in the courtroom that went beyond the actual content of the words spoken.
-- 23 --
Much more subdued than on Friday, Stevens was obviously heeding his counsel’s advice to keep it
cool on the stand—but only to a point. Bristling at a line of questions he considered unfair, Stevens
told Morris “You go right ahead with your questions, miss.” The Senator couldn’t resist fighting off
Morris in some instances, so much that the judge had to admonish the witness: “Why don’t you just
answer her question, sir?....Respond to her question, sir.”
Despite these comments, Stevens was substantially less contentious today than on Friday. That less
aggressive demeanor has to reflect in part his lawyer’s advice, but also it may stem from the enormous
strain and fatigue he must feel. The Senator sits strong on the stand, but he walks slowly and hears
poorly. Stevens was rubbing his eyes this morning before taking the stand. (He’s not the only one who
is tired: After working all weekend on jury instructions, federal prosecutor Nicholas Marsh—about 50
years Stevens’ junior—sits at the government’s table with his eyes closed in the moments before the
jury comes in.)
When Stevens starts to testify this morning, he keeps making the errors of a man close to the end of his
capacity: He keeps referring to Y2K as “YK2” and describes a $150 check in front of him as being
made out for “a dollar and fifty cents.”
Evaluation of the Prosecution’s Performance Today: Good But Not Great
Morris seemed to miss some opportunities when she failed to tie Allen even more tightly to Stevens by
making the Senator list the number of days he had spent with the oil-services magnate each year at
“Boot Camp.”
Similarly, the prosecution could have emphasized Stevens’ chances to learn about how much work
Allen and VECO had done on the chalet if Morris had asked Stevens to state how many days each year
he had been at his Girdwood home between 1999 and 2006.
It is probably fairer, however, to judge the prosecution not against an ideal but instead based on what’s
needed to advance the government’s case. By that standard, the United States of America advanced the
ball today.
Tomorrow, the prosecution and the defense will make their closing arguments. Each side will spend
about three hours trying to persuade the jury.
Next Up: Last Chance: More on the Defense's Likely Closing Argument
Sunday, October 19, 2008

Big Day Tomorrow, and I'll Write as Fast as I Can
Live from the Ted Stevens Trial, Between Day 18 and Day 19
Washington, D.C.--
-- 24 --
But if you must have the latest right away, check the wire services. This blog's built for insight, not for
speed.
P.S. On a personal note, congratulations to my cousins Luanne and Zach for their Rays' terrific victory
over my Red Sox. All the best to the Rays in the World Series, and I only wish my Uncle Dick could
be here to see it.
Posted by Cliff Groh at 8:51 PM Ted Stevens Trial
What the Prosecution and the Defense Might Do in the Rest of the Trial
Live from the Ted Stevens Trial, Between Day 18 and Day 19
Washington, D.C.—
Chief prosecutor Brenda Morris has told the judge that she expects to spend perhaps another hour
cross-examining Ted Stevens on Monday morning. Depending on what comes up in the remainder of
the cross-examination, lead defense attorney Brendan Sullivan may have some questions for his client
on redirect examination.
Following Stevens’ testimony, it appears that the trial will proceed to closing arguments on Monday.
As the side carrying the burden of proof, the procedure is for the prosecution to go first. After the
defense makes its argument, the prosecution gets the last word to rebut the defense’s closing.
What will the two sides do at the end of the trial?
Prosecution
In the remainder of the cross-examination, the prosecution will aim for the same goal it will seek in
closing: Hammer on the evidence most damaging to Stevens. Some of that evidence has already come
into the record from chief prosecution witness Bill Allen's testimony, taped conversations between
Allen and Stevens, and the cross-examinations of Stevens' wife Catherine and Stevens' friend Bob
Persons.
The government can do more during the cross-examination of Ted Stevens, however, to pound home
evidence favorable to the prosecution. The best evidence for the government that could be elicited on
cross-examination of Stevens would come from making him set out:
 The substantial improvements made to Stevens’ Girdwood home and the additional repairs
made there;
 Stevens’ extensive opportunities to learn about those improvements and repairs between 1999
and 2006; and
 Stevens’ frequent contacts with Bill Allen during and after the making of those improvements
and repairs, particularly their annual vacation-style “Boot Camps” and other face-to-face
meetings together.
The best way the prosecution might demonstrate this evidence is to make a graphic during the cross-
examination with four columns like this:
-- 25 --
Year / Improvements and Repairs Added / Days Stevens Spent in Girdwood / Days Stevens Spent with
Allen
Although the courtroom is filled with state-of-the-art video technology, the best way to make this
graphic would be the old-school method of using a marker pen on a simple pad mounted on an easel in
front of the jury.
This graphic would be a timeline that could help summarize a flood of testimony and exhibits for the
jury. Making Stevens help fill out that graphic by giving answers to a series of short, precise questions
would be like preparing a punchlist.
On closing argument, the prosecution could supplement that simple timeline/punchlist by adding one
photograph of each improvement to illustrate the graphic. As one observer pointed out, the before and
after photographs of the home could constitute some of the most damning evidence against Stevens.
Defense
The defense’s task is in some ways more psychological than presentational. The prosecution has got a
mountain of facts, but the defense wants to get the jury to focus on feelings. Lead defense attorney
Brendan Sullivan will likely try to get his client to calm down and stay in control during the remainder
of cross-examination. The Senator and his lawyer will continue to do everything they can to get the
jury to zero in on Allen’s concealment of his role in providing valuable things to Stevens instead of on
the opportunities Stevens had to learn what Allen had done.
Stevens and his attorney need to show somehow that the Senator felt sorry for his brain-injured friend
Allen and let his sympathy cloud his judgment in dealing with the VECO chief. It’s a tough task, but
that’s why Ted Stevens retained Brendan Sullivan and the top-flight Williams & Connolly firm.
The defense closing can probably be summarized by the acronym "BIBTOB." That is, Brendan
Sullivan will likely argue or imply that Ted Stevens was:
Betrayed by his former friend Allen and by his own inattentive wife Catherine
Isolated by his long distance from Girdwood most of the year
Busy from all his duties in the Senate
Too honest to conceal anything knowingly, as his character witnesses testified
Old and distracted
Beneficient in allowing Allen and others to use the Girdwood chalet
Brendan Sullivan will likely rely on several matters revealed during the trial to bolster these themes.
As summarized by Brent Kendall in an article in the Wall Street Journal, those points helpful to the
defense include the apparently excessive and unnecessary costs incurred in VECO's work renovating
the chalet, the confusion Allen showed in his testimony, and Allen's potential motives to shade his
testimony to help the prosecution. Sullivan will also argue that the prosecution can't be trusted, citing
the judge's instruction regarding evidence excluded from the case due to the prosecution's failure to
meet its obligations to give certain evidence to the defense. Sullivan may even ask the jury to discount
Allen's testimony given that the judge angrily announced in open court that someone was sending
-- 26 --
signals from the audience while Allen testified.
If you want to see the closings, knowledgeable court personnel recommend getting in line by at least
8:30 a.m. outside the courthouse.
A Legend Toughs It Out Under Another Lawyer's Lash

Live from the Ted Stevens Trial, Day 18
Washington, D.C.—
It was a different playing field for the dedicated athlete.
Ted Stevens testified all day Friday, and being on the witness stand had to be very strange for the
veteran lawmaker.
The Senator has spent the last 40 years calling powerful people on the carpet, often while he wielded
the gavel at the head of the committee table. Before he entered Congress, he spent years grilling
witnesses as a federal prosecutor and trial lawyer in private practice in Alaska.
So it must have been strange indeed for him to be the one answering the questions in his only
opportunity to speak directly to the jury that will decide his fate.
The lifelong demon exerciser had a good base of fitness to handle the more than five hours on the
stand as apparently the last witness in his criminal trial. But it was an excruciating experience for the
84-year-old in ways that went way beyond the physical.
Sen. Stevens’ Goals in His Testimony
He had to thread the needle between detailing the awesome responsibilities of his Senate seat and
showing all the power he held as Chairman of the Senate Appropriations and Commerce Committees.
Having the jury ponder his heavy responsibilities is good for him (because being extremely busy
suggests that he was unable to monitor closely all the details of his home renovation project), while
having the jury contemplate his clout is bad for him (because a powerhouse should be able to stop a
friendly businessman from showering him with valuable items the Senator didn’t want).
Stevens had to claim strong and proactive maintenance of ethical standards that spurred a frequent
demands for bills for his home remodeling in 2000-2001 and later repairs, while simultaneously
asserting detachment from the reality of receiving and paying those bills.
He had to distinguish sharply between the “lion of the Senate” his own colleague described in court
from the man who apparently couldn’t get a key to his house away from a friend who kept leaving
unwanted stuff in that house and even “creeping” out Stevens’ own daughter when she visited the
home.
-- 27 --
He had to explain the Last Frontier’s business mores to a jury of East Coast urbanites, telling them that
it was not “the Alaska way” to get contracts, bonds, or multiple references before getting your house
renovated.
Most of all, the famously testy Stevens had to keep his temper when the friendly questioning from his
lawyer gave way to an aggressive cross-examination by the chief prosecutor.
I’m Busy, and My Wife Runs the Teepee
Guided by his masterful lead attorney Brendan Sullivan, Stevens made several specific points in his
defense.
The four-decade lawmaker talked about the heavy workload imposed by his job: the constant contact
with constituents, the committee meetings, the frequent international travel.
Stevens explained that while he ran matters outside the household, inside the walls of their homes his
wife Catherine’s word was law and her hands controlled the checkbook. (Chuckles ensued when the
Senator said that he would live differently—with things not always getting off the floor—if he lived
alone.)
In practice, this division of responsibilities combined with Stevens’ role as a Senator to explain how he
might simultaneously request to be billed for things he got and still be ignorant about whether those
bills had been paid.
Stevens vociferously announced his strict code of ethics for transactions, like the meals with friends
and lobbyists: “I don’t let people buy my lunch or buy my dinner.”
It was more difficult, however, if bills were sent to his Senate office, where either his wife or—as
shown in his wife’s testimony, his Senate staff—would be in charge of paying them. After asking for
the bills, Stevens would frequently be unaware if they had ever arrived so they could be paid.
And Bill Allen presented a particular problem: The CEO of VECO—the Alaska-based multinational
oil-services firm—kept providing things for Stevens’ house that Stevens now claims he didn’t want
without sending Stevens bills for them.
Ted Stevens’ Close Friend for Years Is Now Revealed to Him as a Crook and a Liar
The veteran lawmaker’s view of Bill Allen during the trial is clear: The man now unveiled as a
crooked businessman has lied under oath about his old friend the Senator.
Stevens emphatically denied that he ever told his friend and designated home caretaker Bob Persons
anything that would have led Persons to tell Allen that Stevens’ request for a bill was “just Ted
covering his ass,” as Allen testified.
Stevens also denied Allen’s report of a conversation in which the Senator allegedly told the tycoon that
he recognized that VECO was doing a lot more work on Stevens’ home renovation than the company
was billing for.
-- 28 --
And Stevens was particularly vehement in denying Allen’s testimony that Stevens told him in March
of 2006 that Stevens needed to get invoices from Allen to protect both Allen and the Senator from the
scrutiny that had befallen Anchorage real estate developer Jon Rubini after his business dealings with
Stevens went under a microscope. “An absolute lie” was Stevens’ description of Allen’s account of
that conversation at the two men’s annual “Boot Camp” retreat in the desert.
What was murkier, however, was the nature of Stevens’ relationship with Allen before the FBI
announced its presence in their lives.
Stevens struggled to explain how the Harvard Law School graduate and Senate titan had become so
close to the high school dropout and oil-services tycoon that Allen would feel free to put a number of
big-ticket items—including a steel staircase, a professional gas grille, a wraparound deck on the
ground floor, extensive rope lighting, a number of pieces of furniture—into the Senator’s home
without telling him or charging him.
Stevens offered three explanations in his testimony: He and Allen had become such close friends that
Stevens trusted Allen; Allen and Stevens shared the Girdwood home Stevens owned, with Allen using
it more than Stevens did; and Allen’s brain injury in the summer of 2001 made him difficult to deal
with. It was only years after the completion of the remodeling and other repairs, Stevens said, that he
recognized the extent of Allen’s contributions to the project: “Now we realize there’s a lot more
intersection with Bill Allen on this than we ever knew before.”
The prosecution will contend in closing arguments, however, that the documentary evidence of the
Senator’s thank you notes and e-mails to Allen show gratitude, not complaints, from Stevens about
what he knew that Allen had done at the chalet.
The Senator’s testimony suggested a different world on the Last Frontier, where a handshake and a
reputation for honor are more important in getting work done than business formalities. You don’t ask
for somebody’s rate or get a fixed price before you get something done: You ask to do something, they
do it, you pay their bill, and you never use them again if they don’t treat you right.
Similarly, an easygoing lifestyle prevailed at the Girdwood chalet, so it was no surprise that Allen had
a key—Stevens pointed out that at one point there were probably 22 keys out to that small-town home.
It is on this point where Stevens is again disadvantaged by facing a jury in Washington, D.C. rather
than in Anchorage, where the Senator’s invocation of “the Alaska way” would have more resonance.
The dog that hasn’t barked so far, however, is testimony by Stevens to explain why he and Allen kept
going on the annual just-the-two-of-them guys’ trips after Allen sustained his brain injury and Allen
kept forcing big-ticket items on Stevens against the Senator’s will. The jury has heard substantial
testimony from Allen about those annual Boot Camps in California or Arizona where the two men
retreated for dieting, walks in the desert, and enjoyment of wine, and Stevens has acknowledged that
those vacations occurred. There would seem to have been plenty of time face-to-face, the prosecution
will surely argue on closing, for Stevens to straighten Allen out on bills and behavior at the chalet.
Throughout the direct examination, Brendan Sullivan keeps control of his client, a man used to being
in control. Showing his skill as one of the country’s best lawyers, Sullivan’s questions are clear and
-- 29 --
forceful, and he issues orders to Stevens on the stand in a way that less experienced or
less assured counsel might be afraid to.
Cross-Examination Puts Two Short Strivers in the Ring
Ted Stevens is very smart, and he has forgotten more than most people in the courtroom will ever
know. At this point in his life, however, he is poorly suited to serve as a witness at his own criminal
trial, and his cross-examination by chief federal prosecutor Brenda Morris shows why.
The problem is that Ted Stevens is not used to dealing with people who do not love him, owe him, or
fear him. Brenda Morris is not a junior Congressional staff aide dazzled by his stature. She is not a
mayor of a small Alaska town grateful for federal funding for a capital project. And she is not a
freshman Congressman desperate to save a threatened Air Force base back in his swing district.
Ted Stevens’ popularity in Alaska is based on respect for his analytical ability, hard work, and
dedication to fighting for his constituents. He has never in his life been the kind of smooth gladhander
so many politicians are, and it is no accident that he lost two races for the U.S. Senate before getting
into that body through appointment. Ted Stevens has never pretended to be some kind of genial Mr.
Rogers; on the Senate floor he frequently wears ties showing the Incredible Hulk and the Tasmanian
Devil.
The fireworks blazed in the cross-examination in part because the questioner and the questioned share
some similarities. Ted Stevens and Brenda Morris are both short people who have parlayed sharp
intelligence and fierce drive into impressive careers.
Ted Stevens grew up poor and in difficult emotional circumstances to become Chairman of the Senate
Appropriations Committee, the longest-serving Republican Senator ever, and the man Alaska’s biggest
airport is named after. Brenda Morris is a black woman who became Principal Deputy Chief of the
Department of Justice’s Public Integrity Section. Neither of these powerful personalities got where
they are by backing down.
Stevens is full of anger and even contempt towards the federal prosecutor, as those who have watched
him in the Capitol could predict. He is not shy about raising his voice in the Senate, where he has
announced that he is “a mean, miserable S.O.B.” Stevens has signaled that his frequent flashes of
feeling are for effect: He has told Alaskans that he has a trial lawyer’s temper—he uses it, but he
doesn’t lose it.
Stevens was known to be a good trial lawyer as a vice-fighting federal prosecutor himself in territorial
Fairbanks and as a private attorney in Anchorage in the 1960s, but he clearly struggles to keep control
as Morris fires questions at him.
Stevens fights back repeatedly, and can’t resist criticizing the questions he is supposed to be
answering.
“I think you better rephrase your question. That question is tautological….Is that a question? I thought
it was a statement….You’re making a lot of assumptions that aren’t warranted….I’m not going to get
-- 30 --
into a numbers game—you tell me what year you’re asking about….You’re not listening to me. I
answered it twice.”
When Morris asked if VECO served as the general contractor for the remodeling of his home, Stevens
said “They were not. You know that.”
Asked whether the notes and e-mails he sent asking for bills from Allen were really just “covering
your bottom,” the Senator shot back “My bottom wasn’t bare.”
The cross-examination late Friday afternoon did not follow the usual script from a trial advocacy
handbook. Morris did not exercise complete control over Stevens and force him to make a number of
damaging admissions. But the dramatic sparring might still hurt Stevens if the jury decides that
Stevens’ feistiness and righteous attitude actually reflects the kind of arrogance that would lead a man
to think that his record of service and achievement entitles him to gifts and freebies from rich friends.
Once again, the demographics of the jury that came with holding the trial in Washington, D.C. might
hurt Stevens, as a jury that is mostly composed of black women might resent the disdain the Senator
displays towards Morris, an African-American female.
(To get more coverage of Stevens' testimony, you will gain additional insights--as I did--from Martin
Kady II’s article “Stevens faces challenges to win case” in Politico and Tom Ramstack’s piece
“Stevens: Cabin done ‘the Alaska way’” in the Washington Times.)
This Is a Sad Spectacle
Friday’s court session was almost unrelievedly grim and hostile, and the difficulty of the day matched
the stony face Stevens has maintained virtually throughout a trial already four weeks long.
It’s hard not to feel sorry for him. Facing his 85th birthday next month, Stevens has done a lot in a life
whose end he repeatedly referenced on the witness stand. U.S. Attorney in territorial days, Interior
Department Solicitor, state legislator, and U.S. Senator for four decades, Ted Stevens helped bring
statehood, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), major fishing legislation, and billions
of dollars in capital projects and operating expenditures to the state.
As the Almanac of American Politics said, “No other senator fills so central a place in his state’s public
and economic life as Ted Stevens of Alaska; quite possibly no other senator ever has.”
Even Stevens’ worst enemies would acknowledge his intelligence, hard work, determination, and
pride.
His contributions and longevity have been recognized and rewarded repeatedly in Alaska and the
Senate. He needed to be appointed to get into the Senate, but once in he came to enjoy great success at
the polls. Stevens was re-elected once by winning every precinct in the state.
Until this year—when he garnered a tough challenge from Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich—“Uncle
Ted” was in recent years seen as so impregnable that he scared away any kind of stiff competition. One
commentator observed that the Democratic nominees in the two previous election cycles suffered from
-- 31 --
mental illness. In 2002, Stevens essentially kept his fellow Alaska Senator in office, as Republican
Sen. Lisa Murkowski was behind late in the campaign until Stevens announced in a blizzard of
commercials that he needed to have her in Washington with him as his partner in fighting for Alaska.
A civic group named Stevens “Alaskan of the Century” in 2000, and his state's newspapers refer to
federal funding in Alaska as “Stevens money” without attaching those quotation marks.
Stevens rose to become one of a handful of the most powerful people in Congress, and as Chairman of
the Senate Appropriations Committee perhaps the most powerful over the purse. He served as
President Pro Tempore of the Senate, third in line for the Presidency.
After all that success and all that power, however, Stevens has seen much of his life turn to ashes in the
two years since the FBI launched its raids on August 31, 2006 and made the long-running federal
investigation into Alaska public corruption public.
He has been indicted on multiple felony counts and now endures a month-long trial. His attorneys are
running up legal bills that have got to be well over $1 million by now. His old friend Bill Allen has
testified against him.
Stevens is reportedly under federal criminal investigation for matters separate from those in this trial.
Allen and another VECO executive have pleaded guilty to bribing his son Ben, the former President of
the Alaska State Senate who has not been charged with wrongdoing but has publicly acknowledged
being under investigation by several federal agencies.
Stevens has had his wife and his oldest daughter come in and testify as witnesses for him, and he
narrowly escaped having his youngest daughter do the same before the prosecution's errors led to the
elimination from the case of the charges involving that daughter.
And unless the judge somehow stops the trial, Stevens’ fate will be in the hands of jurors whose lives
are very different from his.
Next up: Speculation on the Remaining Cross-Examination and the Closing Arguments
Posted by Cliff Groh at 12:34 PM Labels: Ted Stevens Trial http://alaskacorruption.blogspot.com/
-- 32 --
http://www.alaskadispatch.com/tundra-talk/1-talk-of-the-tundra/231-as-stevens-trial-winds-down-
what-will-happen-next.html
UPDATED: Stevens case headed

to jury
By Cliff Groh
Ted Stevens is off the stand, and both the defense and the prosecution have rested their cases. The lawyers and the judge are
working this afternoon on the jury instructions and the finalization of what exhibits go to the jury in what form (redactions are
very important in some of these items).
Jury has gone home and is coming back Tuesday for closings to start 9:30 a.m. Closing arguments will consume all of
tomorrow. The judge will read the instructions to the jury Wednesday morning, and then the jury will begin deliberations.
****
Washington, D.C.— Chief prosecutor Brenda Morris has told the judge that she expects to spend perhaps another hour cross-
examining Ted Stevens on Monday morning. Depending on what comes up in the remainder of the cross-examination, lead
defense attorney Brendan Sullivan may have some questions for his client on redirect examination.
Following Stevens’ testimony, it appears that the trial will proceed to closing arguments on Monday (SEE UPDATE ABOVE). As
the side carrying the burden of proof, the procedure is for the prosecution to go first. After the defense makes its argument, the
prosecution gets the last word to rebut the defense’s closing.
What will the two sides do at the end of the trial?
Prosecution
In the remainder of the cross-examination, the prosecution will aim for the same goal it will seek in closing: Hammer on the
evidence most damaging to Stevens. Some of that evidence has already come into the record from chief prosecution witness Bill
Allen's testimony, taped conversations between Allen and Stevens, and the cross-examinations of Stevens' wife Catherine and
Stevens' friend Bob Persons.
The government can do more during the cross-examination of Ted Stevens, however, to pound home evidence favorable to the
prosecution. The best evidence for the government that could be elicited on cross-examination of Stevens would come from
making him set out:
● The substantial improvements made to Stevens’ Girdwood home and the additional repairs made there;
● Stevens’ extensive opportunities to learn about those improvements and repairs between 1999 and 2006; and
● Stevens’ frequent contacts with Bill Allen during and after the making of those improvements and repairs, particularly their
annual vacation-style “Boot Camps” and other face-to-face meetings together.
The best way the prosecution might demonstrate this evidence is to make a graphic during the cross-examination with four
columns like this:
Year / Improvements and Repairs Added / Days Stevens Spent in Girdwood / Days Stevens Spent with Allen
Although the courtroom is filled with state-of-the-art video technology, the best way to make this graphic would be the old-school
method of using a marker pen on a simple pad mounted on an easel in front of the jury.
This graphic would be a timeline that could help summarize a flood of testimony and exhibits for the jury. Making Stevens help
fill out that graphic by giving answers to a series of short, precise questions would be like preparing a punchlist.
-- 33 --
On closing argument, the prosecution could supplement that simple timeline/punchlist by adding one photograph of each
improvement to illustrate the graphic. As one observer pointed out, the before and after photographs of the home could constitute
some of the most damning evidence against Stevens.
Defense
The defense’s task is in some ways more psychological than presentational. The prosecution has got a mountain of facts, but the
defense wants to get the jury to focus on feelings. Lead defense attorney Brendan Sullivan will likely try to get his client to calm
down and stay in control during the remainder of cross-examination. The Senator and his lawyer will continue to do everything
they can to get the jury to zero in on Allen’s concealment of his role in providing valuable things to Stevens instead of on the
opportunities Stevens had to learn what Allen had done.
Stevens and his attorney need to show somehow that the Senator felt sorry for his brain-injured friend Allen and let his sympathy
cloud his judgment in dealing with the VECO chief. It’s a tough task, but that’s why Ted Stevens retained Brendan Sullivan and
the top-flight Williams & Connolly firm.
The defense closing can probably be summarized by the acronym "BIBTOB." That is, Brendan Sullivan will likely argue or imply
that Ted Stevens was:
Betrayed by his former friend Allen and by his own inattentive wife Catherine
Isolated by his long distance from Girdwood most of the year
Busy from all his duties in the Senate
Too honest to conceal anything knowingly, as his character witnesses testified
Old and distracted
Beneficient in allowing Allen and others to use the Girdwood chalet
Brendan Sullivan will likely rely on several matters revealed during the trial to bolster these themes. As summarized by Brent
Kendall in an article in the Wall Street Journal, those points helpful to the defense include the apparently excessive and
unnecessary costs incurred in VECO's work renovating the chalet, the confusion Allen showed in his testimony, and Allen's
potential motives to shade his testimony to help the prosecution. Sullivan will also argue that the prosecution can't be trusted,
citing the judge's instruction regarding evidence excluded from the case due to the prosecution's failure to meet its obligations to
give certain evidence to the defense. Sullivan may even ask the jury to discount Allen's testimony given that the judge angrily
announced in open court that someone was sending signals from the audience while Allen testified.
If you want to see the closings, knowledgeable court personnel recommend getting in line by at least by 8:30 a.m. outside the
courthouse.
Cliff Groh is reporting on Ted Stevens’ trial at his blog, www.alaskacorruption.blogspot.com, where these entries first
appeared. Groh is a lifelong Alaskan and attorney with a private practice in Anchorage. Groh worked as a prosecutor for the
Alaska Department of Law, and he has conducted jury trials in Anchorage, Unalaska, St. Paul, Sitka and Sand Point. He has also
served as the Special Assistant to the Commissioner of Revenue, where he worked successfully for the revision of oil taxes
enacted in 1989 that raised taxes on the Prudhoe Bay and Kuparuk fields. He was the principal legislative staff member when the
Permanent Fund Dividend was created. He is conducting research for a book on public corruption in Alaska.
-- 34 --
-- 35 --
Alaska Sen. Stevens Takes Stand -- Will It Pay Off?

Joe Palazzolo and Mike Scarcella
Legal Times
October 20, 2008
Alaska Sen. Stevens Takes Stand -- Will It Pay Off?

Joe Palazzolo and Mike Scarcella
10-20-2008
During jury selection, Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens and his lawyers heard prospective jurors say, over and
over again, that criminal defendants should testify. "Of course," one woman said. "Everyone should."
Not surprisingly, those who voiced this conviction loudest were bounced from the jury pool. And yet
Stevens, confident and at times agitated, took the stand last week to defend himself against charges that
he lied on his Senate financial disclosure forms to conceal more than $250,000 in gifts and home
renovations.
Leading up to his testimony, trial spectators made a parlor game of guessing whether Williams &
Connolly partner Brendan Sullivan Jr. would put the famously blunt-spoken senator on the stand.
Notwithstanding his orthopedic sneakers and avuncular appearance, the 84-year-old senator is known
to be a strong and at times intemperate personality. After 40 years in the Senate, Stevens is more
accustomed to commanding respect than betraying humility, and that showed as he challenged the
government's chief prosecutor for more than an hour on cross-examination Friday afternoon.
A series of blunders by the government -- U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan sanctioned prosecutors
twice in as many weeks for withholding evidence and discovery material -- made Stevens' decision to
testify even more fraught, defense lawyers say.
Why hazard an uneven performance when the momentum is swinging in his favor? Why distract the
judge and jury from the government's self-inflicted wounds?
The answer, defense lawyers and jury experts say, points to an aggressive defense, an inviolate rule of
juror psychology, and a trial that, improbably, is unfolding in the space of the defendant's own re-
election campaign.
In any event, the calculus of the trial changed dramatically when Stevens took his seat between the
judge and jury.
"Once the defendant testifies, then he becomes the center of the universe, and the jury is either going to
believe him or not believe him," says Steven Braga, a partner at Ropes & Gray's Washington office.
UNEVEN STEVENS?
-- 36 --
Stevens' testimony marks the culmination of a typically venomous defense by Williams & Connolly.
Sullivan, with partners Robert Cary, Alex Romain, and Craig Singer, attacked prosecutors and their
case in nearly equal measures.
Stevens is charged with seven counts of making false statements in a wide-ranging federal probe into
Alaska politicians. Prosecutors say the roughly $250,000 in unreported gifts flowed primarily from the
senator's longtime friend Bill Allen and his now-defunct oil services company, VECO. Allen, who
pleaded guilty last year to bribery charges, was the government's chief witness, testifying that he
financed the renovations because he liked Stevens.
Sullivan and his team sought to distance Stevens from "the chalet," as his home in Girdwood, Alaska,
is known, while throwing prosecutors off their footing with four motions to dismiss the case for
misconduct.
Judge Sullivan, who dressed down prosecutors on three different occasions, instructed jurors mid-trial
to ignore key evidence because "the government had an obligation to provide certain information to the
defendant and it did not do so."
In the past two weeks, the defense trotted out five character witnesses, including former Secretary of
State Colin Powell and Sens. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii.
The defense also called Stevens' wife, Catherine Stevens, a Mayer Brown partner, who testified that
she paid all the bills for the renovations and that the couple rarely visited their home in Alaska, relying
on a friend to keep them informed on the progress of the work there. The Justice Department's Brenda
Morris, principal deputy chief of the Public Integrity Section, grilled Catherine Stevens about using a
Senate staffer to manage her personal bills.
And then the defense called Stevens, the first sitting senator in nearly 30 years to testify in his own
defense at a criminal trial. For two hours Stevens testified about his private life and his public service -
- his years in Congress, his stint as U.S. Attorney for Alaska, and his record as a pilot in World War II.
But when the government got its turn, Stevens was combative. He challenged Morris. "You're making
a lot of assumptions that are unwarranted," Stevens declared as Morris explored the friendship between
Allen and Stevens. Stevens responded "What?" in response to questions from Morris more often than
on direct examination. On direct, he routinely looked at jurors when he answered questions from his
lawyer.
Morris questioned whether Stevens is truly a "lion" in the Senate if he could not call the shots and
confront his friend Allen, whom Stevens on direct examination called a liar. The defense team wants
jurors to believe that Allen dominated Stevens.
When Stevens could not remember a year in which metal stairs were installed at the house, he declared
to Morris: "I'm not going to get into a numbers game with you." And another exchange: "You're not
listening to me," he told Morris. "Sir, I'm just trying to get a straight answer," the prosecutor
responded.
Stevens said he asked for bills and never got invoices. The couple said they paid all the bills the family
received. "I report gifts, not things I paid for," Stevens said. Morris declared Stevens was "covering his
butt" when in e-mails and letters he asked for bills. Stevens denied the charge, saying: "My bottom was
-- 37 --
not bare."
Stevens, who serves on the Senate Commerce and Appropriations committees, said he never asked
upfront how much the renovation work would cost because that's not the "Alaskan way." In Alaska,
Stevens explained, work is performed, a bill is submitted, and it is paid. Contracts, he said, are not part
of the deal in Alaska.
Stevens was on the stand Friday for more than an hour before the trial recessed. Cross-examination
resumes Monday; government lawyers do not plan to call any rebuttal witnesses.
RISKY BUSINESS
Trial experts disagree over the wisdom of putting Stevens on the stand.
"The absolute rule is that jurors want to hear the defendant testify," says Arthur Patterson, a Florida-
based social psychologist and jury consultant. "Unless the problem is that your client is a double ax
murderer, put him on and let him make nice with the jury."
Barbara "Biz" Van Gelder, a partner at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, says the risks were profound but
notes that, in false statements cases, it's difficult to shield the defendant from the jury.
"When intent is an essential element of the crime, it's very difficult not to put the witness on the stand,"
Van Gelder says. "I think the jury expects to hear that side of the story."
David Schertler of Schertler & Onorato, a former federal prosecutor, says he was surprised Stevens
took the stand, given the strength of the defense's case leading up to his testimony.
With the character witnesses and the cross-examination of Allen, "the defense has laid the basis for its
case that Senator Stevens did not lie," Schertler says.
On the stand, Stevens raised and lowered his voice and appeared flustered at one point -- taking a drink
of water after an intense 10-minute back-and-forth with Morris. When Stevens made members of the
courtroom gallery laugh, few jurors cracked a smile.
But some measure of churlishness could strike the jury as authentic, says Patterson, a senior vice
president with DecisionQuest, a litigation consulting firm.
"If they perceive that you're acting, then you lose credibility. So there's a fine line where you have to
get a little feisty in defense of your good name. But it's a very fine line," he says.
Stevens' testimony comes at an inauspicious time. Congress' persistently low approval rating has
dipped amid the financial crisis, and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who enjoyed broad support shortly after
her debut as the Republican vice presidential nominee, has seen her popularity drop in polls. None of
this will be lost on the jury in the District -- the city carries a well-earned reputation for being hard on
politicians accused of crimes, Patterson says.
"A defendant's testimony is a very complicated moment in any trial, but this is wildly complicated," he
says.
But Stevens' testimony also presents a political opportunity for the senator, who has been absent from
-- 38 --
his re-election campaign during the trial. (He is in a dead heat with Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich, 49
percent to 48 percent, according to the latest Rasmussen poll.)
In addressing the jury, Stevens has a chance to connect with his constituents. "In this case the
conventional wisdom is turned on its head," says David Bartlett, a specialist in crisis communication.
Normally, defendants project different personas in their public life and their criminal trial. But Stevens
has blended the two amid a tight re-election campaign, says Bartlett, a senior vice president at Levick
Strategic Communications. "He's trying to make a case in trial that will play equally well in the court
of public opinion."
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202425389144
Judge Lambastes Prosecution in Stevens Case, but Refuses to

Dismiss Case
Federal judge says he has no confidence that the Justice Department will follow
procedural rules for exculpatory information
Mike Scarcella
Legal Times
October 3, 2008
A federal judge Thursday lambasted government prosecutors in the trial of Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens
for violating criminal procedural rules, but refused to declare a mistrial or dismiss charges that Stevens
filed false financial disclosure reports.
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan postponed the trial until Monday to give Stevens' defense lawyers
a chance to review unredacted FBI reports the government was ordered to turn over Thursday.
Calling the Brady violation both intentional and troubling, Sullivan said he has no confidence that the
Justice Department will follow rules requiring that they turn over favorable information to the defense.
"It's difficult for the court to believe the government overlooked this exculpatory information,"
Sullivan declared. "I find it unbelievable that this was just an error."
Justice Department prosecutors say they mistakenly redacted an FBI report that contained favorable
information for Stevens and his lawyers at the firm Williams & Connolly. Prosecutors handed over the
documents Wednesday at 11:30 p.m. following a review of FBI reports for an upcoming witness.
At issue are conflicting statements from the government's chief witness, Bill Allen, former owner of an
oil services company in Alaska. In the new information the defense received, Allen told an FBI agent
-- 39 --
that he thought Stevens would have paid for renovations at his home if Stevens had been given an
invoice. Allen was under direct examination before Sullivan postponed the trial.
The defense can use the information for cross-examination. But Stevens' lawyers say the information
would have been included in their opening statement.
"I've been denied the use of a powerful piece of information I should have had," Williams & Connolly
senior partner Brendan Sullivan Jr. said.
Judge Sullivan said he would allow the defense to redo their opening statement if they chose. Defense
lawyers say they are still weighing their options.
Prosecutors denied that the redactions hurt Stevens' case. They noted that before trial, the defense team
was given records in which Allen told investigators that "Ted Stevens wanted to pay for everything he
got."
The Justice Department Office of Professional Responsibility, which reports to the attorney general,
will investigate the misconduct allegation stemming from the Brady violation. Lead prosecutor Brenda
Morris, principal deputy chief in the Public Integrity Section, refused to identify in court the person
responsible for the violation.
Prosecutors who play fast and loose with rules of procedure -- and ignore court orders -- should resign,
Judge Sullivan said.
Jurors in the case were sent home Thursday morning and will be told not to return to U.S. District
Court for the District of Columbia until Monday.
Stevens, 84, is the longest-serving Republican in the Senate and is up for re-election in November. He
requested a speedy trial.
Federal Judge Rejects Challenge to Sen. Stevens Indictment

Mike Scarcella Legal Times September 18, 2008
The criminal charges against Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, accused of filing false financial reports to
obscure hundreds of thousands of dollars in gifts and home renovations, do not violate constitutionally
protected legislative activity, a federal judge ruled Tuesday in dismissing an attack on the indictment.
Williams & Connolly lawyers, representing Stevens, argued in briefs and in court this month to Judge
Emmet Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that government prosecutors
improperly pitched protected legislative activity to grand jurors. Stevens, indicted on seven felony
counts in July, has requested a speedy trial in the hope to clear his name before the November general
election.
-- 40 --
The Constitution's speech or debate clause protects lawmakers from prosecution rooted in legislative
activity. The scope of that protection, attorneys in the white-collar criminal defense bar say, is narrow
and centered largely in drafting, debating and voting on legislation. Run-of-the-mill constituent
services -- for instance, the steps leading up to a vote -- are not protected, government lawyers say.
Government prosecutors say Stevens, the longest-serving Republican in the Senate, wrote letters and
made calls on behalf of employees of VECO, the former Alaska-based oil services company. Stevens
reportedly vowed to take steps to expedite the review and permitting process for a gas pipeline in
Alaska. Former VECO employees are expected to testify against Stevens at trial.
Justice Department prosecutors, led by Brenda Morris, the principal deputy chief in the Public Integrity
Section, say the government made an effort not to cross the line and introduce protected legislative
activity. Prosecutors argue the evidence is central to the case and goes to motive and intent in showing
that Stevens had reason to hide or otherwise fail to report the receipt of gifts and other items from
VECO.
Williams & Connolly lawyers, including Brendan Sullivan Jr., argue the information is unrelated to the
government's case and will be prejudicial. The defense lawyers say the government wants to infer a
this-for-that exchange when such an arrangement was never in place.
The defense team has a chance to appeal Judge Sullivan's order. Brendan Sullivan, lead counsel, could
not be reached for comment. A status conference is set for Thursday morning. The trial is scheduled to
begin Sept. 22 with jury selection.
First reported in The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times
WALL STREET JOURNAL LAW BLOGS

October 21, 2008, 6:06 pm
Life Through a Dirty Glass: The Ted Stevens Trial, a Retrospective

Posted by Dan Slater
The trial of Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, Tuesday, Oct. 21,2008, at U.S. District Court in Washington.
From left: Stevens, his defense attorney Brendan Sullivan addressing the jury, and Judge Emmet G.
-- 41 --
Sullivan, at the bench. (AP/Dana Verkouteren)
Over its month-long span, the Ted Stevens trial acquired several themes and hallmarks: Prosecutorial
blundering, allegations of shady lawyering, the continued dissolution of a longtime friendship, and
seemingly petty spats over design taste and the giving (or loaning?) of gas grills.
Today, the trial provided one final twist before the verdict: According to ABC News, the day opened
with Judge Emmet Sullivan telling lawyers that, in their closings, mention of Colin Powell’s “Meet the
Press” endorsement of Barack Obama was verboten. (At trial, Powell, a key defense witness, called
Stevens’ character “sterling.”)
Otherwise, the day apparently provided little surprise. Prosecutors reportedly ridiculed Stevens’s
explanation of alleged gifts as “nonsense.” Prosecutor Joseph Bottini told jurors that Stevens
surrounded himself with wealthy, generous friends who could be counted on to give gifts and who
could be trusted to keep it quiet.
Stevens’ lead lawyer, Williams & Connolly’s Brendan Sullivan, reportedly told jurors that to believe
the government, you’d have to believe in “a master cover-up by a sinister senator.” Sullivan claimed
that Stevens and his wife paid $160,000 for the remodeling of their Girdwood, Alaska, A-frame, and
that more than covered the cost of the project.
When prosecutors “look at life through a dirty glass,” Sullivan said, “then the whole world looks
dirty.”
But regardless of what verdict comes back, the Law Blog has a tough time imagining a victory for
either side. For Stevens, we will remember his awkward explanation of the infamous massage chair as
a seven-year loan from a friend. And then there’s Stevens’s political career. In the final weeks of his
campaign he’s been stuck in a D.C. courtroom while his opponent, Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich,
has had Alaska to himself.
As for the DOJ’s case against Stevens, prosecutors’ recovery on cross-examination may not have been
enough to make up for their series of missteps that, from the start, launched the trial into theatrics — a
witness sent back to Alaska before his testimony, potentially exculpatory evidence withheld.
What do you think, Law Blog Readers? Can the Stevens trial produce a winner?
Permalink | Trackback URL: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/10/21/life-through-a-dirty-glass-the-ted-

stevens-trial-a-retrospective/trackback/
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/10/21/life-through-a-dirty-glass-the-ted-stevens-trial-a-retrospective/
-- 42 --
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/10/02/dismiss-it-senator-stevens-trial-suspended-for-withheld-evidence/
October 2, 2008, 2:36 pm
“Dismiss It!”; Senator Stevens Trial Suspended for Withheld Evidence

Posted by Dan Slater
As we said yesterday, thank you notes can count for a lot. How
much? For Senator Ted Stevens, who faces charges that he
accepted and failed to report more than $250,000 in gifts, it
may mean a mistrial.
Here’s what happened, according to Legal Times. Click here,

also, for the Times story. Today, U.S. District Judge Emmet
Sullivan suspended the trial of Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, after
it was revealed in court that prosecutors withheld FBI records
-- 43 --
that could have aided in Stevens’ defense, a.k.a., Brady material. The records in question, according to
Legal Times, showed that the government’s star witness, former VECO CEO Bill Allen, who testified
on Tuesday and Wednesday, told federal investigators that he believed Stevens would have paid for the
renovations he is accused of omitting on his financial disclosure forms if the senator had received the
invoices. Here’s another report from the WSJ. (This is the second evidentiary spat in the trial.)
The government waited until last night to hand the records over, which Brenda Morris, the lead
prosecutor, imputed to “human error.”
“It strikes me that this was probably intentional. I find it unbelievable that this was just an error,”
Judge Sullivan said. According to the WSJ, he also said: “Thank goodness we don’t have to rely on the
United States to give [Stevens] a fair trial.”
At one point, lead defense attorney Brendan Sullivan reportedly turned to Morris and fumed, “Dismiss
it!”
Morris conceded Stevens’ lawyers should have gotten the records sooner but declined to say who on
her team made the error. She said the omission had caused no harm because Allen was still on the
stand.
Sullivan scheduled a hearing at 4:30 p.m. today to determine how to proceed. Stay tuned.
Permalink | Trackback URL: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/10/02/dismiss-it-senator-stevens-trial-

suspended-for-withheld-evidence/trackback/
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
-- 44 --
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/10/21/ST2008102102550.html
Fate of Sen. Stevens In the Jury's Hands
Gifts and Home Renovation at Issue
By Del Quentin Wilber

Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 22, 2008; A03
A federal jury today will begin deliberating two conflicting views of Sen. Ted Stevens, the powerful
Alaska Republican charged with lying on financial disclosure forms to hide more than $250,000 in
gifts and renovations to the Alaska house he affectionately calls his "chalet."
Defense lawyers, backed by a string of character witnesses, have portrayed Stevens, 84, as an honest
public servant who conscientiously paid his bills, never lied on the forms and is the victim of
overzealous authorities.
Prosecutors have argued that the senator is a miser who went to extraordinary lengths to hide free
remodeling work financed by Veco, a now-defunct Alaska oil services company, and its top executive.
"This trial has exposed the truth about one of the longest-serving senators, the gifts he received and
what he tried to conceal and the lengths he would go to keep his secrets hidden," said prosecutor
Brenda Morris of the Justice Department's public integrity section.
"He didn't want to be known as the senator with the house that Veco built," she told jurors in U.S.
District Court in Washington.
Brendan Sullivan, Stevens's attorney, countered that the prosecutors view the world through a "dirty
glass" that makes the "whole world look dirty."
"They are trying to convict an innocent man on the interpretation of evidence that is so far from real
life that it would make you sick," he said.
Indicted in July, Stevens requested a speedy trial in the hopes of clearing his name before the
November elections. He is seeking a seventh full term in office.
He testified in his defense, contending that some of the expensive items the government calls "gifts"
were merely lent to him, such as a $2,700 Brookstone massage chair stored in his basement.
-- 45 --
Prosecutor Joseph Bottini of the U.S. attorney's office in Alaska hammered away at Stevens's
credibility, calling his explanations "nonsense."
Bottini said Stevens turned to Bill Allen, a close friend and former chief executive of Veco, for help
with the remodeling work for a simple reason. "The price is always right when it's free," he said.
"He was happy with Veco doing this even though they were the most improbable home contractor
around," Bottini said. "He knew Bill Allen was wealthy. He knew Bill Allen was generous."
Allen, the prosecution's key witness, and Veco workers testified in detail about the transformation of
Stevens's home from 2000 to 2002. The rustic house got a new first floor, two wraparound decks and a
garage.
E-mails introduced as evidence showed that Stevens monitored the work through a friend who lived in
town.
In closing arguments, Sullivan repeatedly returned to a letter that Stevens wrote to Allen in 2002,
thanking the executive for the renovations and requesting a bill. Stevens wrote it after learning that
Allen had decided, on his own, to add the first-floor deck, Sullivan said.
Prosecutors contend that Stevens was simply creating a paper trail to protect himself.
Saying that Stevens paid every bill his family received for
remodeling work, Sullivan noted that the senator and his
wife wrote $162,000 in checks to contractors for
renovations and later saw the expense validated when the
tax value of the house rose by $104,000.
Sullivan reminded jurors that former secretary of state Colin L. Powell and Sen. Daniel K. Inouye (D-
Hawaii) testified to his integrity.
The defense lawyer also criticized Allen, who has pleaded guilty to federal bribery charges. But Bottini
said Allen was believable.
Bottini and Morris also repeatedly needled Stevens for not removing alleged gifts, including the
massage chair.
"Does anyone really believe he thought that chair was a loan?" Bottini asked. "What were the terms of
this loan? Zero percent interest for 84 months?"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/10/21/ST2008102102550.html
-- 46 --
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/10/21/america/Stevens-Trial-Optional.php
The Associated Press
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
WASHINGTON: This was one critical debate he could only sit and listen to.
Ted Stevens, the longest-serving Republican senator and a legendary power broker on Capitol Hill,
could do nothing but slump low in his chair Tuesday as prosecutors mocked him as crooked and two-
faced.
"This case has been a long time coming," prosecutor Brenda Morris said in the closing minutes of
Stevens' corruption trial. "This trial has exposed the truth about one of the longest-sitting senators."
-- 47 --
Stevens, 84, is charged with lying on Senate financial disclosure forms about $250,000 in home
renovations and other gifts he received from his friend, millionaire oil contractor Bill Allen.
Stevens argues that he paid every home improvement bill he received and says he had no obligation to
report the tool box, massage chair, gas grill, furniture rope lighting and other items because he didn't
ask for them or didn't consider them gifts.
With the last word, Morris was relentless. She compared Stevens to a 6-year-old who cheats at hide-
and-seek. She teased that perhaps Santa Claus had delivered Stevens a house full of furniture. She
dismissed Stevens' defense as nonsense.
"If someone told you this exact same story sitting across your kitchen table, you'd say, 'What?'" Morris
said.
Earlier in the day, defense attorney Brendan Sullivan said prosecutors had overblown the case and
twisted the facts to make Stevens seem conniving. He recounted Stevens' 40 years of Senate service,
his World War II record and his dedication to Alaskans.
"Without sufficient evidence, the government comes here late in the night of a good man's life and tries
to brand him a criminal," Sullivan said.
Morris told jurors not to see Stevens as a powerful politician.
"I ask you to do something that very few people have done: Stand up to him," Morris said. "Behind all
that growling, all those snappy comebacks and that righteous indignation, he's just a man."
Stevens is fighting for both his reputation and his Senate seat. He is fending off a tough challenge for
the seat he's held for 40 years from Democrat Mark Begich. Democrats have invested heavily in the
campaign, sensing an opportunity to unseat the legendary Republican and perhaps capture a filibuster-
proof majority in the Senate.
Jurors were expected to begin deliberations Wednesday. The 12-member panel must be unanimous to
find Stevens guilty.
Stevens served as his own star witness, testifying for three days about renovations that transformed his
modest mountain cabin into a handsome two-story home with wraparound porches, a wine cellar and a
sauna.
Allen, the government's star witness, testified that his employees did most of the work on that house
and that he never billed Stevens. Though Stevens sent letters asking for invoices, Allen said he figured
Stevens was just trying to cover himself.
Just as Stevens was pilloried, Allen's honor also came under attack. Sullivan called him a "bum" and
told jurors to question his motives. Allen, who has pleaded guilty to bribing state legislators, cut a deal
with prosecutors to spare his children from being prosecuted.
"What would a man say on a witness stand to protect his

children?" Sullivan said.
-- 48 --
To believe the government, Sullivan said, you'd have to believe

in "a master cover-up by a sinister senator."
With the trial wrapping up, the political ramifications became the talk of both political parties.
"If the trial comes to a conclusion and, as he believes, that he is found innocent, I think that he will win
that election up there," Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., chairman of the National Republican Senatorial
Committee, said Tuesday. "If it goes the other way, obviously it really won't matter what happens in
the election."
Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton sent an e-mail to supporters Tuesday, urging them to back Begich and
others involved in close races.
"With Barack Obama and Joe Biden in the White House and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate,
there's nothing we can't accomplish," the e-mail read.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/10/21/america/Stevens-Trial-Optional.php
-- 49 --
-- 50 --

10-21-08 - Quotes and Clippings US V Stevens

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

10-21-08 - Quotes and Clippings US V Stevens

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

News clipping - October 21, 2008 US v.

Ted Stevens 08-00231 page 1 of 50 pages

October 22, 2008

Closing Arguments in Stevens Trial

The jury will begin its deliberations on Wednesday.

Sen. Ted Stevens covered up gift-taking, prosecutor says

"If you look at life through a filthy

Schmitt is a Times staff writer.

Prosecutors: Ted Stevens had generous friends

Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

From Paul Courson

 Judge accuses lawyer of signaling to client

Here's a collection of the most memorable and notable quotes from

SEN. TED STEVENS

— Stevens, after lead government prosecutor Brenda K. Morris

"That's just an absolute lie."

— Stevens, in response to testimony from Allen that Stevens was

"My bottom wasn't bare."

— Stevens, after he was asked if the e-mails he sent regarding bills

— Stevens, answering questions about a chair he received from Allen

"The worst that can happen to us is we run up a bunch of legal fees,

— Stevens, speaking to Allen in a secretly-recorded phone call in

"No. That's crazy."

— Stevens's friend, Bob Persons, in response to whether he told

— Hatch, referring to Stevens

— Powell, referring to Stevens

— Inouye, referring to Stevens

— Stevens's lead attorney, Brendan V. Sullivan Jr., in his opening

— one of Stevens's defense attorneys, Robert Carey, referring to

"When it comes to things around the tepee, the wife controls."

— Stevens's attorney, Sullivan, referring to Catherine Stevens and how

— contractor Augie Paone, referring to an alleged conversation with

— Paone, referring to the senator's corruption trial

— Morris, speaking to Stevens

— Morris, referring to Stevens's frequent calls to Allen for home

"This is a case about a public official who took hundreds of thousands

— Morris, referring to Stevens

"Something smells here."

— U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, referring to two pieces of

— Sullivan, referring to Allen's lawyer, Robert Bundy, who

By Derek Kravitz | October 21, 2008; 7:30 AM ET Stevens Trial

Prosecutor Says Sen. Stevens's Explanations Are 'Nonsense'

Bottini said Allen was a believable witness. He also hammered at Stevens

Stevens Grilled About Gifts, Renovations

Powell Endorsement Reaches Stevens Trial

On Stand, Stevens Flashes Temper

Perhaps the defense succeeded in casting some reasonable doubt on the

The government will make a brief rebuttal this afternoon.

Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures

Monday, October 20, 2008

2. Nullify this Mouse

The Furniture Bill Allen Deposited in Stevens’ Girdwood Home

The Big Generator Bill Allen Bought for Stevens’ Chalet

The Role of Allen and VECO in the Chalet’s Renovation

The Status of the Massage Chair in Stevens’ Home in Washington, D.C.

The Emotions in the Courtroom

Evaluation of the Prosecution’s Performance Today: Good But Not Great

Sunday, October 19, 2008

What will the two sides do at the end of the trial?

signals from the audience while Allen testified.

A Legend Toughs It Out Under Another Lawyer's Lash

It was a different playing field for the dedicated athlete.

Sen. Stevens’ Goals in His Testimony