The Fieger Indictment

The indictment of Geoffrey Fieger and his partner Vernon Johnson is a troubling read. They are accused of using strawmen to break campaign finance laws. Fieger's hired Wyoming legend Gerry Spence, who boasts he has never lost a criminal case. Spence will be put to the test in this case.

Central to the indictment is the claim that the defendants caused employees, the children of employees and vendors to make contributions to Jonathan Edwards' presidential campaign in 2003 and 2004.

Under federal law, individual contributions are limited to $2,000 per person. Fieger, Johnson and their spouses made maximum contribututions in early 2003.

According to the indictment, money was moved in the following ways:

Within days of the partners' making their contributions, 11 of their employees and their spouses -- a total of 19 people in all, made maximum individual contributions as well. Within days, each employee was given a bonus together with payroll taxes; the net amount of the bonus was the amount contributed to the campaign. A couple months later another 11 employees and their spouses, and in some cases their children, maxed out on contributions to Edwards. Within days, these employees, too, were given bonuses that netted the amount of the campaign contribution.

Vendors were then paid for work they didn't perform, writing checks to the Edwards campaign the very day some of them were paid by Fieger's firm. And friends of Fieger's were also given money they apparently rolled over into the campaign. Or so the indictment says.

All told, the feds allege that some $127,000 was rolled into the Edwards campaign by the use of strawmen.

Fieger complains it is all a federal set up, and has filed suits against the Attorney General and those involved in the investigation. Perhaps. But Fieger's ego borders on megalomania; it is always all about him. I doubt that lights burn throughout the night at the Justice Department in a war-room dedicated to cooking up an admissible fantasy about Fieger.

The timing of the contributions and bonuses raises questions. Could Fieger have been so arrogant as to believe he could shuffle money around in such an obvious manner with impunity?

Rumor has it that Spence has been involved in the case for months. It appears from press accounts that Fieger may have testified before the grand jury convened to evaluate the claims against him. I'd love to read that grand jury transcript. What of the timing of the contributions and bonuses? Mere serendipity?

This case may be the biggest challange Spence has faced since the acquittal of Imelda Marcos. Spence would be wise to hire Oliver Stone as an investigator. Making Fieger out to be an innocent victim of a massive Government conspiracy will be about as difficult as identifying the co-conspirators in the Kennedy assassination.

Comments

[Daniel Quackenbush]

Maybe this is a case where a little "jury nullification" can be urged upon the jury. That is, if Spence can somehow get the concept of jury nullification past the judge and to the jury.

If there are jurors out there like me who dislike the government telling me who I can support and by how much money wise, maybe Spence has a chance.

[markm]

IIRC, Fieger himself twice got the idea of jury nullification past the judge and to the jury while defending Dr. Kevorkian - who went out and helped another patient kill themselves after every victory. The third time, with a suicidal patient who wasn't all that sick and a new law that was specifically intended to stop Kevorkian, the jury didn't buy it.

Fieger's other claim to fame is sounding more nutty than the Libertarian and Constitutionalist candidates while running for governor as a Democrat...

If I wound up on that jury panel, I'd vote for nullification, but I wouldn't get through voir dire unless no one was paying attention. I'd be quite happy to send Fieger to prison, but not for violating THAT law...

[Aaron]

When Dr. Kevorkian was convicted, Geoff Fieger was no longer his lawyer.