The Case Against Sen. Fumo

Lots more links here: Roundup of Inquirer's Fumo coverage

Also: Text of Fumo indictment | United States Attorneys website

When court resumed, Sheppard said the defense intended to present no witnesses. He told the judge that disqualifying the firm would pose a hardship for Fumo. Yohn scheduled oral argument on this very important legal issue for July 10.
The A/C, meanwhile, was downright cold. Now, Sprague had a chill.

Throughout the proceeding, Sheppard has attempted to make clear that his firm, Sprague & Sprague, didn't break any ethical or legal rules. At the end of his re-cross examination of the agent, he asked a related question, and Judge Yohn jumped in.

The judge wanted to make it clear, he said: "I haven't heard any evidence that anything was done improper."

And with that, we've have broken for lunch.

Be back at 1:15 pm sharp. (Courtroom 14, if you'd like to swing by and catch the arguments.)

Thanks to the building folks who got the word about turning the A/C up.

Now, about lunch: If Pagano's is out there, we've got about 20 hungry folks up here...

At one point during the ultra-dry hearing, Sheppard conferred with Zauzmer and Pease, saying he wanted to avoid time-consuming questions on areas where the prosecution and the defense agree.

Judge William Yohn drew laughter in the courtroom when he said, "At some point, I'd like to know exactly what you do agree on."

As dry as the hearing was, the air-conditioning finally kicked in.

The bloggers are having some technical troubles sending their posts.
-- Inquirer Online

Yesterday, prosecutors suggested through testimony that email was destroyed after a search warrant was executed at Fumo and Citizen's Alliance - which, if true, means that email was destroyed after it was absolutely clear that the FBI wanted it. That's obstruction of justice.

Today, Sheppard clarified that, if this indeed happened, his firm had nothing to do with it.

Defense lawyer: Any suggestion that anyone at Sprague firm suggested that email be deleted?
FBI agent: No.

Yesterday, there was testimony that Fumo's private eye conducted sweeps of his offices and home to check for electronic surveillance.

Lawyer: There was no allegation that there was an attempt to spend senate money on sweeps, right?
FBI agent: That's correct.

Political funds from PACs were spent.

Defense lawyer Sheppard asked FBI agent Humphreys if she met with John Estey, Gov. Rendell's chief of staff. He noted that she didn't fill out an FBI interview sheet (form 302) of the meeting. She said it was an informal meeting, so one wasn't necessary.

A rough transcript:
FBI agent: We discussed background on the government and the way it worked?
Lawyer: Did you ask him about Fumo?
Agent: Only in the way the government worked.
Lawyer: Did he make favorable comments about Fumo?
Agent: (Silence, and a smile).
Prosecutor: Objection! Relevance.
Judge: Well, sustained. It might make a good headline but..."

"Good morning, Ms. Humphreys," said defense attorney Mark Sheppard.
"Good morning, Mr. Sheppard," replied FBI Agent Vicki Humphreys.
The politeness came at the start of cross-examination of Humphreys, a 12-year veteran of the FBI who is one of two "case agents" in the prosecution.
The other is Agent Kathy McAfee, a longtime veteran of the FBI corruption squad who was seated next to Assistant U.S. Attorneys Robert Zauzmer and John Pease.
The testimony was pretty dry -- with questions about how the investigation began, how many witnesses were interviewed and how many documents were retrieved.
Even so, the hearing drew a number of spectators, including well-known white-collar criminal defense attorney Robert Welsh.
Fumo, however, was not in court -- just his team of lawyers, Richard Sprague, Sheppard and Geoffrey Johnson. The prosecution is seeking to disqualify the Sprague firm from representing Fumo, contending that firm lawyers also represented victims and witnesses in the case.

We are underway. FBI agent Vicki Humphreys is on the stand, and defense lawyer Mark Sheppard has begun his cross-examination. She is expected to be the only witness today. A stipulation or two may be read into the record later.

Then we are expecting closing arguments.

Will we be done by lunch? Tough to say. (Note to building staff: please turn up the a/c)