A Criminal Enterprise

“If I took off and flew around this courtroom today, would that change your opinion of the laws of gravity?”–David McDonald, on behalf of Governor Siegelman

It was a long and boring and tedious and tiring day at the courthouse. It was a day that rarely heard the name Paul Hamrick or Don Siegelman or Richard Scrushy or Mac Roberts, because it frankly wasn’t about them. It was a day when the nodding jury, struggling to stay awake, reacted strongest to a witness who said, “Lanny Young was quite a character.” Heads bobbed like there was finally something they understood or could relate to. It was that kind of day.

It occurred to me, while sitting in a mostly empty gallery, on the seventeenth day of a conspiracy case, that we are all attending the wrong trial. Just like they did in 2003, in the aftermath of the HealthSouth scandal, the federal government and their investigators, fueled by political or personal ambition—sometimes egged on by populist sentiment—fell over themselves to get the guy at the top. Get the kingpin, the Mastermind. The guy on top was the prize for the hungry public servants who slavishly served themselves at the very expense and sacrifice of the values they claim to preserve and adhere to. The faith in our government and tax payer dollars are in the balance, they’re on the line. We heard today that tax which was not collected because of the revenue ruling that was part of the indictment, totaled some $4.2 million (which according to testimony, was actually recovered via the company dropping a refund claim as part of the deal) and conservative estimates would place the cost of this trial, including the exhaustive and intensive investigation at least between $15-20 million. This story and this action was fuelled more by media excess, who like the prosecution, are fueled more by personal and professional ambition than anything else. It is fun to bring down the high and powerful, and some people have developed it into kind of a specialized skill. They become rather adept at it, and although they do it with glee and aplomb, it is an added bonus that their efforts sell more papers and achieve more fame while being lifted up by the wreckage of the fallen.

We’re at the wrong trial. Lanny Young should be sitting next to George Beck, his attorney, at the defense table. Many people wanted to etch their names in light or scratch them in the annals of crime fighting lore. Maybe everyone in Alabama would know them. Maybe they would even be heard in Washington. And in the meantime, instead of building real and viable cases against the criminal elements that have wreaked havoc on Alabama from Montgomery to Birmingham, they were busy cutting deals and holding press conferences. It’s only fun if they get the guy on the top. But we’re in the wrong trial. If there are any of them left who actually read these notes, I know the Siegelman/Scrushy haters will be out in force, but I’ve been to Birmingham, I’ve been to Montgomery, and I have begun to understand what is the true and real criminal enterprise that is operating within this state. No matter who you like or do not like, for whatever reason, we should be angry. Sooner or later, this enterprise, if left unchecked, will come for each of us in turn, and in the meantime, countless criminals will take deals and be let go, so they can avoid accountability and continue to live their sordid lives of crime. And if left unchecked, in the end, we’ll find ourselves at the wrong trial (again). We should be angry. I know there will be those who will say I’m stupid, like they said about the Birmingham jurors, or they’ll say I don’t understand the nuances of the case or that these people are bad in ways I just can’t see. That may be true, but I only see what the jury sees. Stephen Feaga has been saying some of these things or coming close to them and if I close my eyes I can see Alice Martin, I can see Richard Wiedis. I know he won’t, I know none of that gang will, but I only can hope he says that he’s sorry when the jury acquits the four defendants; I can only hope he apologizes for wasting our time and our money, and for mangling our faith just a little bit more.

We’ve heard that corruption and graft caused millions of dollars of taxes on chemical waste to go uncollected; we’ve heard that corruption caused beer to flow freely on Sundays, at Talladega; we’ve heard from numerous sources that said the idea behind the GH Construction project was sound and would not only have been good for the state, but would be great for the state. More than one witness said the process made sense then and it makes sense now. So now Bob Riley is the guy on top, and we’ve got that other guy under indictment, so because these things came about because of corruption, we have of course repealed the Sunday beer sales at Talladega (and they can thank Lanny for that) and the legislature has drafted and passed the necessary bill that would repeal the revenue ruling, restoring the old taxes at the chemical dump; and of course the new administration picked up on the strength of the warehouse idea, and we’re saving the state millions because of it. We’re doing all that, aren’t we? It’s been done, right? Oh that’s right. I have yet to hear a figure that has been tossed around in the courtroom, that is being used as evidence of the graft and avarice, that doesn’t pale in comparison to the money they are wasting in bringing this action, which when coupled with the fact that the real criminals are going to walk away after short prison terms, I think we should demand more. I am well aware that there will be people who choose to be angry at me because they wish I would have come to court and saw something different. But that is because the resolution of this kind of anger is hard, the kind that we’ve become accustomed to, as shaped by the media and our fast paced environment, is just too easy. I also wish that I came to court and saw something different. But I didn’t. (Please re-read McDonald’s comment at the beginning of this entry.)

So what happened in court today? For the most part, we heard further evidence that Lanny Young is a criminal and that he made a lot of deals that benefited Lanny Young. I kept expectantly waiting for the links that would tie what he was doing to Paul Hamrick or Don Siegelman but it was another wait in vain. (Whenever relevancy issues were raised by the defense, Feaga and Perrine promised the links would come, promised it would all become clear. They promised.) Oh yeah, I forgot, they had some sort of agreement whereby every single thing that Lanny Young did that was wrong was somehow authorized and carried out by Siegelman himself. I know this will sound kind of funny, but in all seriousness, I’m surprised they didn’t charge Siegelman with adultery. After all, Lanny Young was carrying on with his girl friend, cheating on his wife for years. That wasn’t part of the agreement? So seriously, how are we to know where the agreement ends and Lanny Young begins. (My apologies to Lori Siegelman for that comment, but it had to be said.) The jury has been waiting expectantly too, the jury that I’ve been spending a lot of time watching lately, and they’re looking pretty confused as well.

The days testimony included some records people, number crunchers and pencil pushers (which is not to offend either group as some of my closest friends do both) who confirmed that we lost money on the tax thing and a company was moved up the list—we’re not sure exactly why, they didn’t say, only that Lanny was involved—of companies that were in line to issue tax exempt bonds. We heard that the GH Construction project was a great idea that was executed poorly and that Lanny Young had some problems with his mortgage. About the only substantive witness that was on the stand today was Bill Blount, the investment banker who was taped by Lanny Young. Blount was an interesting guy who had a clear, direct take-charge manner of speaking that made you believe that he knew what he was doing and made you believe what he was saying. One of the things he said was that he would never pay Lanny Young for consulting or lobbying, and that if he needed something, he had no problem picking up the phone and calling Paul Hamrick or Don Siegelman himself. So much for everything going through Lanny. He also said that he wasn’t the only one that felt that process for being qualified to issue tax exempt bonds was wrong, and that many people in the business community had been calling the state offices. On the courthouse steps, the prosecution said that this somehow offered proof of what they were saying. Huh? Really? Isn’t it just possible that if lots of their constituents from the business community were calling, powerful people like Bill Blount, that they may decide it is something they should do for the state. And that this could easily happen independently of what Lanny Young wanted, or thought he was able to get when prodded by investigators. Incidentally, Blount said he called the state director of finance, Henry Mabry, about this issue. The last guy on the stand droned on and on about how his company didn’t want to back the GH Construction project because they didn’t think the company was sound, and said they only did it because some guarantors signed on (like Bill Blount) and because they changed the parameters of the project. Siegelman’s and Hamrick’s name were not mentioned and this was just going over and over things that we already know about Lanny’s project. When it came time for cross-examination, Judge Fuller asked Siegelman’s team if they would take long. Vince Kilborn said it would take about one second, “Have a good day, Mr. Campbell.” We are about to switch to Mac Roberts’ portion of the case, but if the prosecution is going to continue to put on these kinds of witnesses, the defense could do that with all of them. Jury’s are always told they are not to make up their minds until they have heard the entire case, and I’m sure they dutifully try to do this. But they know. So do you.

For those that are angry about these comments, I am truly sorry. Once again, please re-read David McDonald’s comment at the top of this entry. In the days to come, that truth will grow on you.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

The End
The end is near soon. Someone asked me by email how long I thought this thing would go, which caused me to do some calculations. My best guess, including the jury deliberations, has the verdict around the 13th of June, with the best case being around the 8th of June and the worst case being around the 16th. Obviously the jury deliberation period is a variable that is impossible to fix with any certainty. If charges don’t get thrown out, then the jury will have many charges to deliberate over, so a quick hours-long verdict is not likely, but I don’t think they will go more than a few days either. And yeah, there would have to be some sort of a miracle for the verdict to come back on or before June 5th (primary eve).