BingoGate: Judge tosses some counts, allows jury to deliberate others

US District Judge Myron Thompson dismissed some charges against key defendants in the federal corruption trial, but will allow the jury to deliberate on the majority of the counts in the original indictment. Count three—which charged casino owner Milton McGregor and lobbyist Robert Geddie—with attempting to bribe Joseph Crosby, an employee of the state. However, some who are more closely following the trial believe count three believe it involved Barry Mask. UPDATE: Confirmed. It was the $5,000 alleged bribe of Mask.

There is also a possibility that Thompson will dismiss other charges as well. That news—if there as any—should dribble out this afternoon.

Last Friday, all defendants rested their cases, with only Tom Coker’s defense team calling a single witness. Attorneys had reached the decision after a meeting Thursday night.

Not many legal analysts are expecting the defendants to be convicted on every remaining count, but neither are they expecting that all defendants will walk, either. The speed with which the defense rested nonetheless indicates that the defense teams don’t believe the US Attorney’s office met the burden of proof.

People who have attended trial proceedings have told IBCR that the prosecutors were caught off guard by vigorous and effective cross examination of key witnesses. The defense’s use of Senator Scott Beason’s embarrassing racial remarks also caught the prosecution off guard. Lead prosecutor Justin Shur came to this trial with stellar credentials as a prosecutor, having won convictions in several high profile trials.

Recall however that in the process of nearly wrecking the case during the pre-trial discovery process, then lead prosecutor Peter J. Ainsworth “took one for the team” and stepped aside. Shur has won cases where he was the lead dog from start to finish. Bringing him in just weeks before a jury was seated forced him to play catchup and matched his skills against some of the best criminal defense lawyers in the country.

What started out as a promising, solid opportunity to rid Goat Hill of some very bad actors appears to be developing into botched job. The fact that Judge Thompson has now twice seriously considered motions to dismiss and has granted a handful of them doesn’t give the fans of honest government much reason for optimism.

We’ll see what the jury believes.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

BingoGate Trial: Lobbyist claims as many as 20 others targeted

 

We are now five weeks into one of the most significant criminal trials in the history of the state and testimony rolls on. For the past week, lobbyist Jarrod Massey has been on the stand, testifying about crimes he has already confessed to committing—namely, bribing legislators and conspiring with casino owners to rig a vote on a piece of gambling legislation that would have put a constitutional amendment on the 2010 ballot to legalize electronic gambling in Alabama.

Under cross examination by defense lawyers Thursday, Massey stated that he believed federal prosecutors are targeting up to 20 additional individuals in connection with their probe into the Alabama political machine. This should come as no surprise. It’s been known since January that the feds were turning onto a trail that led them well off the reservation of the original October indictment. What wasn’t known then (and remains largely a mystery today) is who and what the expanded probe is targeting. What also wasn’t known (and still remains a complete mystery) is when additional indictments will be unsealed.

From the testimony of confessed co-conspirator and former casino owner Ronnie Gilley, we do know that the probe has not been put to bed and that he expects to be on the stand well into the foreseeable future. And, due to a mishap that occurred Wednesday, we also know the identity of at least one heretofore unindicted co-conspirator—former State Representative Terry Spicer. One of the jurors in the trial was inadvertently provided with a copy of a statement made by Spicer in a “proffer,” a document that includes statements of fact and evidence provided by a defendant who intends to plead guilty. This demonstrates that Spicer is either negotiating a deal with prosecutors now, or has already cut a deal and hasn’t had his day of allocution before the bench.

As was prominently pointed out here, repeated throughout the spring and still reiterated in the Dothan Eagle item here, there have been numerous documents filed under seal and kept away from public eye. There have been just as many closed-door hearings between prosecutors and defense lawyers as there have been hearings in open court. So anyone who tells you with a straight face that they have any clue about who, about what or about when the BOOM is coming is either a raving lunatic or a party to the federal crime of disclosing grand jury proceedings. The same is absolutely true for anyone who claims that there’s nothing to worry about here; that so-and-so is safe and that such-and-such institution or organization is safe. In either case, your best option is to turn and run away.

There are many big-time names that could be among the two dozen or so additional targets that Massey believes he knows about, and Massey would likely not know about every angle the feds are examining in this expanding probe. People in very high circles are nervous, and Massey’s testimony this week shows they’ve got a damned good reason to be.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

BingoGate: Prosecution unprepared for defense team speed

If the ongoing bingo corruption trial was a football game, you’d compare it to a talented, experienced and somewhat overconfident (some say arrogant) team from some Yankee state taking the field against a squad of SEC players with speed, talent and reputation that the prosecution never took seriously. Oddsmakers, seeing the matchup on paper, put the prosecution team as a heavy, early favorite and never looked back.

Oops. It’s midway through the first quarter and …  what’s that score again?

Several sources within the legal community tell IBCR that the prosecution started badly and has been trailing since day one. For starters, the very first witness for the prosecution—Gardendale Senator Scott Beason—had his clock cleaned by McGregor defense team member Bobby Segall over a racially explosive use of the term “aborigines” to describe Greene County residents. Beason was one of three legislators cooperating with federal authorities during the corruption investigation during the 2010 legislative session. He had worn a wire to a meeting Greene County is home to GreeneTrack, one of the gambling operations that would have seen its business take off if a gambling bill had passed the 2010 legislature. Greene County is a majority black county, and half of the jury hearing the case is black as well.

The prosecution should have seen that coming and should have prepared its witness a helluva lot better than it did. Witnesses say he was caught completely off-guard by the defense’s use of the remark, as well as their use of additional embarrassing exchanges between Beason and the other parties in a meeting he had secretly recorded for federal investigators. While the prosecution should have prepared him better, he could have prepared himself better as well. How smart is it to use racially insensitive remarks like while wearing a wire, knowing full well that the conversation would likely be played before a packed federal courtroom?

The righteous indignation from the left was predictable and noisy, with the entire Democrat apparatus of the state condemning Beason as a racist and demanding his resignation.

Several people—including one who has attended several days of testimony—have indicated that the prosecution may have already lost the jury and has a very long road ahead if they expect to obtain convictions on a majority of the counts in the case. There are several key witnesses remaining to take the stand, and the prosecution has so far revealed a small portion of the more than 12,000 voice and text conversations investigators collected during slightly more than four weeks of electronic surveillance. So while the prosecution again finds itself in a moment of peril, they are probably behind and will probably need a second half comeback to win.

When legal analysts go back to dissect this case, they will likely point to the Department of Justice making a change at the top of the prosecution’s trial team and identify it as a key development. Prior to March 30, the lead prosecutor for the case was Peter J. Ainsworth, one of DOJ’s top career prosecutors. But Ainsworth’s team badly bungled the process by which the prosecution was to turn over evidence it intended to use at trial, very nearly causing the case to be dismissed by an angry Magistrate Judge. Ainsworth was replaced by Justin Shur, another one of DOJ’s top guns in criminal trials. Shur’s late involvement in the case may have had him playing catch-up even as the jury was being struck. Instead of preparing witnesses and finishing pretrail preparations, he was getting up to speed on the intricacies of a very complex public corruption case.

Had he been the lead dog from day one, he might have been prepared enough to realize that Beason’s inflammatory comments were toxic to his case and done more the blunt the damage. Instead, the defense team used its speed, skill and agility to execute and end-around and put the prosecution in a hole.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook, and visit the Timeline Page for a complete chronology of events.

 

Judge Warner’s fall from the bench could be major milestone

Last week, the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission filed a complaint against Montgomery County Family Court Judge Patricia Warner, who had suddenly resigned just months into her second term. The complaint alleges 74 instances of judicial misconduct in a broad array of cases, including at least one involving people that casino owner Milton McGregor would like to keep quiet.

McGregor, along with his team of lobbyists and legislators, are currently standing trial in US Federal District Court on charges of conspiracy, bribery, money laundering and fraud. The trial enters its third week of testimony tomorrow and is expected to last throughout the summer.

What’s notable about Warner’s resignation and indictment by the Judicial Inquiry Commission is that as McGregor’s political influence wanes, he is becoming increasingly unable to wield his power and keep people silent. You may want to note that June 22—the date the Warner story became public—as a potential turning point in the cause of ridding this state of influences that have corrupted its political processes, its financial institutions and possibly even one of its great institutions of higher learning.

Alabamians got a windfall victory earlier this year when long-standing Auburn University Board of Trustees member Bobby Lowder decided not to seek another term on the school’s governing body. The controversial, polarizing control freak had been accused of micromanaging affairs at Auburn, leading the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) to place the university on Academic probation—one step away from yanking the school’s accreditation and throwing the state and the higher education system into economic, political and educational turmoil. Two years ago, Lowder saw his financial empire collapse when the once-mighty Colonial BancGroup was thrown into receivership by banking regulators. With the end of his term on the AU Board, the Shakespearean figure’s fall from grace will be nearly complete. Lowder can harm this state’s financial industry no more, and no longer will he operate the levers of power at Auburn University.

McGregor’s case continues to move forward, with the best outcome for all Alabamians becoming all the more likely—his conviction on charges of attempting to corrupt the political process and deny Alabamians the governmental integrity they deserve and expect. Goat Hill will never be completely rid of sleaze and corruption, but having it rid of McGregor’s influence is in the interest of all Alabamians.

Regular readers of this blog will recall that during the legal wrangling over the defense attorneys attempts to compel the government to release certain evidence they planned to use at trial, it became obvious that the Department of Justice had expanded its probe beyond the scope of the original October 2010 indictments in the bingo case. To this day, we still have no idea who or what was the target of that probe, but it was important enough for the government and the Court to keep bookshelves of legal filings, motions and arguments under seal. However, since it was McGregor’s side of the alleged conspiracy that made the most noise over the release of the evidence, it’s no stretch to conclude that he was involved in the expanded probe.

As his and others’ influence wanes, those with knowledge of further shady dealings should feel empowered to speak out; to tell their stories of control, greed and corruption. Regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum; regardless of where you live; regardless of which school carries your allegiance, the need has never been greater to clean this place up and leave our descendants with a better place. One of the most enduring qualities of a free society is that we believe in the rule of law, not the rule of men. When the system is corrupted and too much power is wielded by too few people, we have an innate desire to speak out; to do something about it. To tell the truth.

Removing Warner from the bench has removed yet another means of influence from a once too powerful man. He can’t keep people quiet anymore, and his ability to retaliate against those who do speak out wanes by the day.

As the story of this struggle unfolds, we may one day point to Warner’s resignation and indictment as a key milestone.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook, and visit the Timeline Page for a complete chronology of events.

BingoGate: Aubie takes the stand

Since I created the photoshop image seen on the right, I have ever so patiently waited for the opportunity to use it in an honest-to-goodness legal context. That opportunity has come today, as Alabama State Representative Charles Barrett “Barry” Mask (R-Wetumpka) takes the stand as a witness for the prosecution in the ongoing trial of nine people—including some prominent Auburn graduates or Auburn boosters—who are accused of corruption and bribery in connection with the bingo scandal in the 2010 legislative session.

Casino owner, Auburn booster and one-time Colonial Bank board member Milton McGregor and an army of lobbyists are accused of a “quid pro quo” bribery scheme with legislators in an attempt to gain their support for getting a constitutional amendment on the November 2010 ballot. If passed, the amendment would have legalized electronic bingo machines in parlors and casinos.

Mask is not only a 1980(?) graduate of Auburn, he also holds the distinction of being named the very first Aubie, the ubiquitous and obnoxiously in-your-face mascot for the Auburn Tigers athletic teams. Mask was selected in 1979.

The Alexander City native cooperated with federal investigators during their spring 2010 probe of the alleged conspiracy, and will face questions from the prosecution beginning this morning. His testimony is expected to last several days.

Aubie the Tiger probably won’t incriminate his alma mater or any current or former officials of the school. He might however, finger Milton McGregor and his lobbyist, fellow AU graduate Robert Geddie as the masterminds of the scheme to buy votes.

Mask’s testimony probably isn’t going to be a barn bombshell. But the temptation to use my extraordinarily popular fark to poke a little more fun at teh fambly was simply too strong to resist.

The trial is expected to last many more weeks. I’m sure similar opportunities will present themselves between now and the start of the 2011 football season, which is now only 75 days away.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook, and visit the Timeline Page for a complete chronology of events.

BingoGate: Motion to dismiss causes FBI agent to leave courtroom (IBCR Exclusive)

There was a bit of dramatic curiosity in yesterday’s jury selection proceedings for the BingoGate trial. Tuesday was the second day of attorneys querying prospective jurors regarding their views on gambling, politics and whether they could be impartial.

But in a rather odd development, defense lawyers objected to the presence of FBI Special Agent Keith Baker. Baker has been the lead investigator on this case almost since its inception during the 2010 session of the Alabama legislature. During that session, Milton McGregor, Ronald Gilley and a host of lobbyists were alleged to have bribed lawmakers to sway their vote on a bill favorable to their business interests—namely, a constitutional amendment and referendum on electronic bingo gambling.

One would think that the presence of an FBI agent like Baker at the jury selection process wouldn’t be that big of a deal, right? However, based on court documents filed by defense attorneys and an order entered by District Judge Myron Thompson, the team of defense attorneys has apparently filed yet another motion to dismiss some or all of the charges against their clients, and at least one interpretation of the court filings indicates that Baker’s actions during either the conduct of the investigation or the hearings related to the wiretaps may be a cause for Judge Thompson to act.

Briefs on the defense motion to dismiss—which was filed under seal and therefore unavailable to the public—are due on June 13.

Out of an “abundance of caution,” the defense asked Judge Thompson that Baker no longer be allowed to witness courtroom proceedings until the matters raised in the motion have been resolved. Thompson agreed, and Baker left the room.

More developments as they arise.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook, and visit the Timeline Page for a complete chronology of events.

BingoGate: “Let the show begin!”

One of the biggest trials in the history of the state of Alabama is set to begin today, as jury selection kicks off what is expected to be many weeks of testimony, evidence, cross examination, daring aerial acrobatics, amazing animal stunts and of course, the clowns.

Nine defendants, including casino owner, political powerbroker and Auburn booster Milton McGregor, mega-lobbyist and Auburn graduate Robert Geddie and a host of legislators will stand trial on charges of conspiracy, bribery, money laundering and fraud. The prosecution team is led by Justin Shur, one of the Department of Justice’s rising star litigators. Shur’s fingerprints are all over several of the US Attorney’s office’s most prized convictions, including a bribery conviction against former New Orleans Congressman “Dollar” Bill Jefferson and fraud conviction against an Army noncommissioned officer.

It is going to be a circus, but it’s going to have its moments of tense courtroom drama as well.  Here’s a short look at the expected strategies of the “offense” and “defense.”

What the Offense Must Do:

Prove that Milton McGregor and his band of merry lobbyists bribed legislators in a “quid pro quo” arrangement, offering them campaign cash, campaign appearances by country music stars, jobs, polling assistance and other things of value. In exchange, the legislators would support a bill that would place a constitutional amendment on the November 2010 ballot legalizing electronic bingo gambling.

Show, through hours of recorded telephone conversations, that the legislators willingly took the bribes and agreed to the quid pro quo arrangement. The FBI recorded more than 12,000 telephone conversations over approximately one month’s time. They have McGregor, Geddie, Tom Coker, Ronnie Gilley, Jarrod Massey and Jennifer Pouncy all talking to each other and the legislators they’re accused of bribing. The prosecution must show that the accused committed numerous illegal acts in furtherance of the conspiracy, and that in doing so, deprived the people of the state of Alabama of their “honest services” as public officials.

What the Defense Must Do:

Prove that this was “business as usual” in the halls of the State House in Montgomery. Basically, the defense wants the jury to believe that no quid pro quo existed at all. McGregor, Gilley and other politically powerful people and organizations regularly support candidates who support their legislative proposals and overall political goals. Yes, it’s a lot of money. Yes, it looks dirty. But it’s not illegal and it’s been going on since, well, since like forever.

Prove that the recorded phone conversations are nothing more than “business as usual” behind the scenes. The defense believes that many of the transcripts of recordings are exculpatory, meaning that some of the stuff the accused talk about shows there was no criminal intent; that the players were conscious of overstepping the legal boundaries and crossing over to the Dark Side.

The show will go on before a “sold out” audience. National, regional and local media will almost certainly jam every seat in District Judge Myron Thompson’s courtroom. With defense teams representing nine defendants plus the prosecution team, sidebars are going to be courtroom GOLD.  It’s unlikely that there will be room for even a handful of ordinary public citizens, but the perp walks this morning and on the mornings to come over the next several weeks should also be something of a spectator sport.

I won’t be live-blogging the trial. I’ll be relying on media reports and court documents just like everyone else. But if I see something unusual or noteworthy from any of my resources, I’ll be sure and pass it along.

Getcha some popcorn folks, and Let The Show Begin!

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook, and visit the Timeline Page for a complete chronology of events.

 

BingoGate: McGregor files yet another motion to dismiss

Attorneys for Milton McGregor today filed a new motion to dismiss the indictment against him. The indictment alleges that McGregor and a group of gambling interests and lobbyists conspired to bribe public officials and get a gambling bill passed in the 2010 legislative session.

McGregor’s side of the alleged conspiracy has mounted the most vigorous defense of any group among those originally indicted and today’s filing shows that they aren’t letting up.

In today’s motion, McGregor argues that the original grand jury that handed down the multi-count indictment last October was improperly instructed as to what constituted a violation of federal law on bribery. Specifically, McGregor argues that the prosecution has been pursuing the case based on an improper interpretation of the law and accordingly, improperly instructed the grand jury last fall.

The defense also notes that while dismissals of indictments are extraordinarily rare in cases like this, the action is warranted because of the error. If the Court agreed with McGregor and threw out the indictment, it would set new precedent and I frankly don’t see that happening. The “flagrant deceit” standard for doing so is much higher than the argument laid out by McGregor’s defense team, and the government will likely have an easy time getting the Court to agree. Put it this way—in order for the Court to have a clear cut reason for throwing out the indictment, the defense would have to show that the prosecution’s conduct was so awful that it flagrantly deceived the grand jury into producing an indictment it otherwise would not have.

Good luck with that. I’m no fan of some of the members of the prosecution team, especially those who have been chastised by other District Judges for umm…  prosecutorial misconduct. But the defense doesn’t seem to have reached that bar, this time.

Jury selection for the USA vs McGregor et al is slated to begin Monday morning, June 6 at the federal courthouse in Montgomery, Alabama. I see no reason why this thing doesn’t go to trial next week but hey…  With this bunch, who knows what could happen?

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook, and visit the Timeline Page for a complete chronology of events.

 

BingoGate: Desperate McGregor subpoenas Bob Riley

Laughable.

Filing under seal early last month, attorneys for casino owner Milton McGregor requested the court issue a subpoena for former Alabama Governor Bob Riley and several other former and current state officers.

It’s a desperate measure and the Alabama Attorney General’s office is rightly seeking to have the subpoena quashed, claiming that any testimony Riley et al could provide would be irrelevant. And, if it is relevant, then it’s protected under the same Executive Privilege provided to sitting and former Presidents of the United States.

Having Riley and the other officers testify to the matters in the subpoena would not only be privileged under the separation of powers concept of American government, it could also compromise completed, ongoing and potential future investigations of criminal wrongdoing by exposing the tactics, techniques and procedures used to catch bad guys.

If you’re a crook, wouldn’t you just love to know exactly how law enforcement and the executive branch of government goes about catching you?  Of course you would.

The subpoenas should be quashed and Riley should proceed on his planned motorcycle tour of the country.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.

BingoGate: Judge allows the wiretap evidence to be heard at trial

This should come as no great surprise. Last night, US District Judge Myron Thompson filed his decision accepting the recommendations of Magistrate Judge Wallace Capel that the defendants’ motion to suppress the nearly 13,000 recorded phone conversations be denied.

This is pretty much the decision I expected.

While the motions to suppress that and other related evidence represented the greatest moment of peril for the government’s case against Milton McGregor, his army of lobbyists and the legislators they are accused of bribing, the government did everything it could to bungle the matter.

Perhaps that’s why, in his ruling handed down last night, District Judge Thompson is expressly providing the defense with an avenue for appeal following any verdict:

---

The motions to suppress the wiretap recordings (Doc. Nos. 553, 556, 560, 564, 572, 573, 586, and 588), filed by defendants Milton E.McGregor, Thomas E. Coker, Robert B. Geddie, Jr., Larry P. Means, James E. Preuitt, Quinton T. Ross, Jr., Jarrell W. Walker, Jr., and Joseph R. Crosby, are denied without prejudice and with leave to renew, within seven days after the return of the jury’s verdict at trial, limited to a response to the government’s submission on the duration of minimization with respect to calls minimized (Doc. No. 1082). If the motions are not  renewed, the court will issue an opinion based on the current record. If the motions are renewed, the court will consider the matter anew and issue an order and opinion based on the current record and any additional evidence submitted by the parties in connection with the defendants’ response to the government’s submission on the duration of minimization with respect to calls minimized (Doc. No. 1082).

---

This pretty much wraps up the pre-trial business of the case. There are a few wranglings left to deal with regarding what the prosecution and defense would like to present at trial, but the heavy lifting has been done.

Jury selection is slated to begin June 6, less than three weeks from now.

Exit Question: The two weeks before the Lee Farkas trial saw several defendants plead guilty and turn against the flamboyant former mortgage banker. Do we see some flipping in the next few weeks here?  My guess is that it’s not likely, but we’ll see.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook, and visit the Timeline Page for a complete chronology of events.

Court of Appeals throws out some Siegelman & Scrushy counts. Impact to BingoGate? UPDATE: Blow to defendants

News breaking today: Appeals court overturned some convictions, upheld most others and remanded the case back to the District Court for resentencing.

Last week, attorneys were in court for a hearing on USA vs McGregor et al, in which US District Judge Myron Thompson expressed some concerns over not having a decision from the appellate court. This decision could have a significant effect on how many and what type of counts the the prosecution ultimately brings against defendants at trial, currently scheduled to begin June 6, just weeks from now.  Thompson has also privately expressed frustration over the 11th Circuit’s inability to produce an opinion.

Now, he’s got one.

UPDATE: And it looks like Thompson has more than adequate guidance now, and will likely DENY the defendants’ motions to dismiss the counts alleging that campaign contributions and other items of value were provided to state officials in exchange for favorable treatment (i.e., a vote in favor of certain legislation).

---

Siegelman and Scrushy’s bribery convictions in this case were based upon the donation Scrushy gave to Siegelman’s education lottery campaign.12 As such, the convictions impact the First Amendment’s core values – protection of free political speech and the right to support issues of great public importance. It would be a particularly dangerous legal error from a civic point of view to instruct a jury that they may convict a defendant for his exercise of either of theseconstitutionally protected activities.

In a political system that is based upon raising private contributions for campaigns for public office and for issue referenda, there is ample opportunity for that error to be committed.

The Supreme Court has guarded against this possibility by interpreting federal law to require more for conviction than merely proof of a campaign donation followed by an act favorable toward the donor. McCormick v. United States, 500 U.S. 257 (1991). In reviewing a Hobbs Act prosecution for the federal crime of extortion under color of official right, the Court said:

Serving constituents and supporting legislation that will benefit the district and individuals and groups therein is the everyday business of a legislator. It is also true that campaigns must be run and financed. Money is constantly being solicited on behalf of candidates, who run on platforms and who claim support on the basis of their views and what they intend to do or have done. Whatever ethical considerations and appearances may indicate, to hold that legislators commit the federal crime of extortion when they act for the benefit of constituents or support legislation furthering the interests of some of their constituents, shortly before or after campaign contributions are solicited and received from those beneficiaries, is an unrealistic assessment of what Congress could have meant by making it a crime to obtain property from another, with his consent, “under color  of official right.” To hold otherwise would open to prosecution not only conduct that has long been thought to be well within the law but also conduct that in a very real sense is unavoidable so long as election campaigns are financed by private contributions or expenditures, as they have been from the beginning of the Nation.

The district court in this case instructed the jury that they could not convict the defendants of bribery in this case unless “the defendant and the official agree that the official will take specific action in exchange for the thing of value.”

---

From today’s ruling, we can now answer the question: Is a campaign contribution a bribe?

The Courts’ answer: Sometimes.

UPDATE II: In another crushing blow to the defense in USA vs. McGregor et al, Scrushy and Siegelman argued that the quid pro quo arrangement involving a campaign contribution in exchange for favorable treatment had to be express, meaning that there had to be some evidence that the parties to the conspiracy had to overtly agree with one another that something of value was being exchanged for some favorable official action. Furthermore, Siegelman and Scrushy both argued that the agreement had to have been overheard or “by means of electronic surveillance.”

The Court disagreed, stating that if the public official has obtained a payment to which he was not entitled, knowing that the payment was made in return for official acts, he is guilty of the crime alleged.

In the BingoGate case, there actually is evidence from means of electronic surveillance, and now that the wiretap evidence in that case will be heard by a jury, the prosecution’s chances at conviction took a big step forward with this decision today.

UPDATE III: The 11th Circuit opinion affects Counts 2 through 17 in USA vs McGregor et al, which is 16 of the original 33 counts in the indictment.

UPDATE IV: As expected, US District Judge Myron Thompson has ordered all parties in the BingoGate case to file supplemental briefs discussing the impact of Siegelman, due no later than May 13.

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook.