Siegelman attorney calls for special prosecutor

Published 9:44 pm Monday, February 25, 2008

WASHINGTON — Attorneys for imprisoned former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman called Monday for the Justice Department to bring in a special prosecutor after a key government witness was quoted as saying he was told to write out his testimony to “get his story straight.”

Vince Kilborn, an attorney for the former Democratic governor who contends Republican politics was behind his prosecution, said the defense was never told of any written testimony by Nick Bailey, a former Siegelman aide whose testimony was crucial to the government.

In CBS’s “60 Minutes” program Sunday, Bailey was quoted as saying prosecutors met with him some 70 times and had him repeatedly write out his testimony because they were frustrated with his recollection of events.

The written notes, if they existed, could have damaged the credibility of Bailey’s story, but no such notes were turned over to the defense, as would have been required by law, Kilborn told The Associated Press.

Bailey, who pleaded guilty in the corruption case, was interviewed in prison by CBS, which said in the Sunday segment: “He told us the prosecutors were so frustrated they made him write his proposed testimony over and over to get his story straight.”

Louis Franklin, the assistant U.S. attorney who led the Siegelman prosecution, called Bailey’s reported claim “absolutely not true.”

“We don’t ask witnesses to write out their statements,” Franklin said. “If Nick is saying he wrote out some notes, he did that on his own. He certainly did not share that with us.”

Siegelman was convicted on six bribery-related and one obstruction of justice charge in 2006 and began serving a sentence of more than seven years last June. Bailey was the key witness who claimed Siegelman appointed then-HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy to a hospital regulatory board in exchange for Scrushy arranging $500,000 in contributions to a campaign for a state lottery spearheaded by Siegelman.

“We got certain interviews that showed Bailey was changing his testimony … but 70 meetings is not close to what’s reflected in those documents,” Kilborn said. “If it takes 70 meetings to get a key witness’ testimony straight, that seems outrageous to me.”

Franklin denied asking Bailey to write out his testimony, but he acknowledged that Bailey had some difficulty reconstructing details, in part because Siegelman’s administration did not use written calendars. But Franklin said those questions came out at trial and the Siegelman defense team had full opportunity to raise doubts to the jury about Bailey’s claims.

Franklin’s denial puts him in the position of disputing a claim by one of his key witnesses. But Franklin said he questions whether Bailey really said what was reported.

Bailey’s attorney, George Beck of Montgomery, did not immediately return calls for comment Monday.

A “60 Minutes” spokesman said the program stands by its reporting.

Kilborn said the evidence would warrant a new trial and that he planned to make the request for a special prosecutor directly to U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey or President Bush.

Art Leach, Scrushy’s attorney, said that if the “60 Minutes” account about Bailey is true, it warrants an investigation.

“That one witness turned the entire prosecution,” he said. “Nick Bailey ought to be placed under oath and he ought to produce those records.”