Thoughts on the FBI's $200,000 Payment to Frank Prewitt

Indio—


Except to say that Vic Kohring’s lawyers understandably want to compare his case to that of Ted Stevens (guilty verdicts overturned) as opposed to that of Pete Kott (still a felon), I’ll wait until the prosecution responds to Kohring’s post-trial motion to dismiss his case to walk through the legal arguments. For the moment, I’ll confine myself to a discussion of one bit in the filing that raised a lot of eyebrows.



The payment of $200,000 to key informant Frank Prewitt by the FBI is a surprise, more in terms of Prewitt’s professed motivations than from the standpoint of what the feds got.

Although neither the feds nor Prewitt would confirm the payment, the money seems pretty certain to have changed hands. The defense cites federal documents provided in post-trial discovery as the source for the information, and neither Prewitt nor the FBI would deny the payment when the Anchorage Daily News inquired about it.

If the federal government ever attempted a full-dress justification of this payment, I assume that the argument would include these points:


(a) Prewitt worked a lot over more than two years assisting the federal investigation of Alaska public corruption code-named “POLAR PEN.”

(b) His work and cooperation generated big dividends for the feds. Federal prosecutors announced some time ago that that Prewitt's efforts allowed the feds to get the wiretaps on key figures Bill Allen and Rick Smith as well as former State Rep. Tom Anderson (R.-Anchorage). Those wiretaps—particularly those on former VECO executives Allen and Smith—allowed most of the prosecutions the probe has produced.

Even more intriguing in its own way is the contrast between this news of cold cash when placed alongside Prewitt’s own statements about his motivations. Prewitt spent so many hours over so many months wiring up and informing against a number of people, including some long-time associates (and maybe even friends). To explain his extensive cooperation, Prewitt has repeatedly emphasized his good citizenship and his interest in becoming spiritually whole, not the anticipation or hope of receipt of money (or any fear of prosecution he might have harbored).

The FBI apparently gave Prewitt his payment at a ceremony at FBI headquarters attended by some federal prosecutors and FBI agents. Prewitt’s book focuses on the praise federal officials lavished on him at that event as well as the gag gift he received (a shirt without a bug). Somehow, he manages to omit any mention of a $200,000 check.

Traffic Cop in the Desert, Plus a Note on My Talk

Indio, California—

I’m visiting relatives out of state, so all I’m going to do this morning is point you toward two notable items available on the Internet:

1. Lisa Demer of the Anchorage Daily News has the story that the new filing by former State Rep. Vic Kohring’s new lawyer asserts that the FBI paid key informant Frank Prewitt $200,000, apparently after he testified in the Kohring case. (Note that Prewitt provided information and assistance to the FBI for more than two years.) The FBI and Prewitt would neither confirm nor deny the payment to the Daily News. I’ll have more to say about this apparent payment and this filing after I’ve had a chance to read the filing. Until then, Demer’s story is at http://www.adn.com/2010/03/23/1196639/filing-fbi-paid-prewitt-200k-during.html on the Internet.

2. A recently departed Department of Justice official told a law school audience yesterday that the Department’s decision to dump the prosecution of former U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens was “painful” but “the right thing to do based on the circumstances of that case.” Former Deputy Attorney General David Ogden said that the Department had “abandoned a case it believed in on the merits” when Attorney General Eric Holder decided to request that the prosecution be dismissed after the jury returned guilty verdicts. Ogden said, however, that the decision to drop the case in the midst of allegations of prosecutorial misconduct had served the broader goal of showing that federal prosecutors respected the rights of defendants even when it hurt. The Blog of Legal Times reports that Ogden acknowledged that the decision to kill the Ted Stevens case almost a year ago had “rankled career prosecutors and hurt morale.” You can read the whole account at http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2010/03/out-of-doj-former-deputy-attorney-general-ogden-opens-up.html on the Internet.

And in response to commenter Howard, I’m still thinking about how to get out my presentation from last Thursday evening. Thanks for your interest.

Karen Loeffler Sworn in as U.S. Attorney for Alaska

Anchorage—

The District of Alaska got a new top lawyer yesterday, as Karen Loeffler shed the “interim” tag at a ceremony featuring several figures in the Alaska public corruption investigation.

It was odd to see Bill Allen’s lawyer Bob Bundy and Frank Prewitt’s attorney Mike Spaan sitting in places of honor in the jury box in the jam-packed federal courtroom, but their prominent roles showed how our system works. People like Allen and Prewitt in big trouble with federal prosecutors often reach for former U.S. Attorneys if they can afford those pricey counsel, particularly if they want to make deals.

Spaan hired Loeffler more than 20 years ago, and Bundy also served as her boss in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the 1990s. I have apparently known her even longer, as she and I worked together in 1986-87 in the Anchorage District Attorney’s Office.

Another person I met while working at the D.A.’s Office spoke at length in what is formally known as an “investiture.” Joe Bottini long ago left his post as a law clerk to become an Assistant U.S. Attorney, and yesterday he read the remarks by two other former U.S. Attorneys who would not make the ceremony. Bottini is better known to readers of this blog as one of the prosecutors in the “POLAR PEN” federal investigation into Alaska public corruption, most notably on the trial team in the five-week trial against then-U.S. Senator Ted Stevens. Standing at a lectern saying nice things about his boss was certainly a more pleasant experience than spending hours and hours with his Washington, D.C. attorney defending him in the ongoing probes of prosecutorial misconduct in the Ted Stevens case.

As noted by the speakers, intelligence, hard work, and practical instincts helped Karen Loeffler reach a long-held goal. Some observers also mentioned her fanatic interest in the outdoors, but it worth teasing out how the lifelong dedication to physical activity helped this former Dartmouth College tennis captain and varsity downhill skier become such a trial lawyer and litigator.


Litigation has been called a blend of sports, theatre, and politics, and it seems to help in litigation to have a background in playing sports. A lot of good trial prosecutors, in particular, have backgrounds in football, hockey, or other physically aggressive activities.

To succeed consistently at any regulated contest, you’ve got to want to win, know how to win, and understand how to win within the rules. Participation in competitive sports imparts these lessons in memorable ways at an early age.