U.S. v. Ring Bill of Particulars

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ))

v. )) No. 1:08-cr-274-ESH

KEVIN A. RING, ))

Defendant. )____________________________________)

BILL OF PARTICULARS BY THE UNITED STATESPURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE COURT’S JULY 7, 2010 ORDER

The United States of America, by and through its undersigned attorneys, hereby

respectfully submits this Bill of Particulars pursuant to the Court’s Order of July 7, 2010 (Dkt.

153). Paragraph 2 of Docket 153 requires the following:

On or before July 13, 2010, the government shall file a bill of particulars identifyingwhich of the overt acts listed in Count I of the Retyped Indictment [Dkt. 112] are relevantto an alleged scheme to provide public officials with things of value in exchange for“official acts," as that term is defined in Jury Instruction No. 31 of the first trial [Dkt.113]. The bill of particulars shall specify the identities of the public officials, things ofvalue, and official acts at issue.

Pursuant to the Court’s Order, the Government has reviewed Docket 112 and identified with

specificity each of the overt acts listed in Count I of the Retyped Indictment that relate to the

honest services fraud object, as well as the identities of the public officials, things of value and 1

Because the Order focuses only on the “exchange” of things of value for official acts,1

the Government has not identified those official acts that were rewarded, in violation of thegratuity statute, 18 U.S.C. § 201(c).

In addition, the Government notes that United States v. Valdes, 475 F.3d 1319 (D.C. Cir.2007) implies that the definition of “official act” for a gratuity, 18 U.S.C. § 201(c), is narrowerthan the definition of “official act” for a bribe, 18 U.S.C. § 201(b). See Valdes, 475 F.3d at 1327(“We believe that § 201 thus reflects a kind of balance between the bribery and gratuity

Case 1:08-cr-00274-ESH Document 153 Filed 07/13/10 Page 1 of 9

official acts at issue. 2

In addition, the Government has created Appendix 1 that identifies the public official that

Ring and the co-conspirators conspired to corrupt, as well as the paragraph numbers of overt acts

in Count 1 of the the Retyped Indictment referring to things of value and official acts, which the

Government intends to prove at trial as part of conspiracy to commit the honest services fraud

scheme.

Please note, pursuant to Paragraph 2 of the Court’s Order, the Government has only

discussed the “overt acts” in Count I of the Retyped Indictment. The Government has not

undertaken an effort to identify each official act or thing of value that will be proven at the

violations. For the former, it defines the predicate acts broadly, but the required compensatorylink narrowly; culpability attaches for ‘any official act,’ ‘any fraud,’ or ‘any act in violation of [a]lawful duty,’ but the payment at issue must actually influence the act or omission. See §§201(b)(1)-(2). For gratuities, the reverse is true; the predicate acts are defined narrowly(excluding, for instance, mere violation of an official duty), and the required compensatory linkis defined more broadly (‘for or because of,’ even where the compensation has had noinfluence).”).

Pursuant to the Court’s Scheduling order (Dkt. 152 Paragraph 3), the Government intendsto file a motion on July 19, 2010 asking the Court to revisit the legal ruling regarding the juryinstruction provided in the first trial regarding the definition of “official act” in order to alignmore directly with the instructions issued in United States v. Jefferson, 07cr209 (E.D.VA), anddelivered to the jury on July 30, 2009. Those instructions included the following for thedefinition of an “official act” in a bribery charge:

An act may be official even if it was not taken pursuant to responsibilities explicitlyassigned by law. Rather, official acts include those activities that have been clearlyestablished by settled practice as part a public official's position. Moreover, an act on aparticular question or matter may still be official even if the public official did not haveauthority to make a final decision or take binding action on the issue.

For ease of reference, the Government has identified the following paragraphs that we2

do not intend to prove at trial and, consequently, have no objections to redacting from theRetyped Indictment: 33, 82, 83, 102, 106, 111, 112, 130, 147 and 151.

2


second trial beyond those identified as overt acts in Count I. Nor has the Government catalogued

all of the official acts and things of value that were proven in the first trial.

Respectfully submitted,

JACK SMITHChiefPublic Integrity Section

DENIS J. MCINERNEYChiefFraud Section

Dated July 13, 2010 By: /s/ Nathaniel B. Edmonds NATHANIEL B. EDMONDSAssistant Chief, Fraud SectionU.S. Department of Justice1400 New York Ave, NWWashington, D.C. 20005Ph: [email protected]

PETER M. KOSKITrial Attorney, Public Integrity Section

3


mailto:[email protected]

APPENDIX 13

PublicOfficial

Overt Act inCount I:

Thing of Value

Overt Act in Count I: Official Act

JohnAlbaugh

• Numerousmeals and ticketsto events fromMarch 2002 toOctober 2004including 30, 31,32, 34, 36, 39, 45,46, 47, 48, 50, 51and 84.

• Assistance in obtaining funding for advocacy ofabstinence, including communication with other Housestaffers and a request for an insertion of an earmark (30);• Assistance in obtaining earmarks for infrastructureimprovements for Ring’s and Abramoff’s clients, includingensuring that the earmarks were on the appropriations list,made it into the final bill and through the reconciliationprocess (36, 37, 38, 41, 42, 43, 44, 123);• Assistance regarding future earmarks for Ring’s clients,including meetings with the Pueblo of Sandia regardingattorneys fees for the land dispute claim (52) and City of ElkGrove regarding infrastructure projects (53).

JohnDoolittle

• Numerousmeals, tickets toevents, trips andpayments to JulieDoolittle fromJanuary 2000 toOctober 2004,including 56, 57,61, 62, 68, 69, 70,72, 73, 74, 75, 76,78, 79, 81, 85, 99,108, 109, 110,114, 115, 116,122, and 136.

• Assistance regarding the immigration status of CarmencitaAbad, a vocal advocate for wage and labor reform in theCommonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, includingsending a letter to INS (55);• Assistance in obtaining appropriations for the CNMI,specifically, appropriations for Rota and Tinianharbors, ports, and airports, including speaking with othermembers of Congress (58, 59);• Assistance regarding Puerto Rico’s commonwealth status,including the introduction of a bill regarding statehood (62,63, 65), and chairing a hearing on Puerto Rico statehood (77,78);• Assistance regarding the Internet Gambling ProhibitionAct, specifically, efforts to prevent legislation harmful toRing’s and Abramoff’s client’s business interests, includingsigning a letter (66, 67), and meeting with Ring’s client (72);• Assistance with an earmark for a Russian housing project,including meeting with Ring and Abramoff’s Russian clients

Please note that while this appendix includes relevant paragraphs of “overt acts” in3

Count I of the Retyped Indictment that relate to things of value that were exchanged for officialacts, this list does not include all of the “official acts” or “things of value” that the Governmentanticipates proving at trial or that were proven in the first trial.

1


(74);• Assistance in obtaining appropriations for a CNMI waterproject, including meeting with other members of Congress(91);• Assistance in obtaining an earmark for a jail grant for theMississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, including speakingwith other members of Congress and congressional staffers(95, 97, 98, 101);• Assistance with a tribal-governance dispute within the Sacand Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa/Meskwaki,including meeting with the client and signing a letter to theDepartment of Interior (125, 127);• Assistance seeking tribal recognition for one of Ring’sclients, the Mashpee Wampanoag, including meeting withthe client and signing a letter to the Department of Interior(132, 134);• Assistance in inserting earmarks into various legislationwhich benefitted Ring’s and Abramoff’s clients (120, 121.123).

DavidLopez

• Numerousmeals, tickets toevents and tripsfrom January2000 to October2004, including54, 62, 64, 66, 67,86 and 107.

• Assistance regarding Puerto Rico’s commonwealth status,including the introduction of a bill regarding statehood (62,63), and working on a hearing on Puerto Rico statehood (77,78);• Assistance regarding the Internet Gambling ProhibitionAct, specifically, efforts to prevent legislation harmful toRing’s and Abramoff’s client’s business interests, includingsigning a letter (67) and meeting with Ring’s internet clients(72);• Assistance in obtaining an earmark for the Choctaw jail,including meeting with another Congressional staffer andhaving Doolittle speak with other members of Congress (95,97, 98, 101);• Assistance in obtaining an earmark for wastewaterinfrastructure improvements in Placer County, California(121).

PeterEvich

• Numerousmeals, tickets toevents fromJanuary 2000 toOctober 2002

• Assistance regarding the immigration status of CarmencitaAbad, a vocal advocate for wage and labor reform in theCommonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, includingcontacting and sending a letter to INS (55);• Assistance in obtaining appropriations for the CNMI,

2


including 54, 57,60, 66, 67, 71, 80,84, 88, 90, 92, 94,103, 105, 113 and117.

specifically, appropriations for Rota and Tinianharbors, ports, and airports, including speaking withCongressional staffers (58, 59);• Assistance regarding the Internet Gambling ProhibitionAct, specifically, efforts to prevent legislation harmful toRing’s and Abramoff’s client’s business interests, includingassistance getting members of Congress to sign a letter (66,67);• Assistance in obtaining appropriations for a CNMI waterproject, including meeting with other Congressional staffersand having Doolittle meet with other members of Congress(89, 91, 93).

GregoryOrlando

• Numerousmeals and ticketsto events fromJune 2001 toOctober 2004,including 87, 88,100, 104, 113,119, 124, 128 and129.

• Assistance in obtaining earmarks for infrastructureimprovements for the City of Lincoln, including submittingan earmark request (118, 120, 123, 128, 131);• Assistance in obtaining Doolittle’s agreement to co-sponsorlegislation to award a Congressional Gold Medal to ChiefMartin of the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (124);• Assistance with a tribal-governance dispute within the Sacand Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa/Meskwaki,including the signing of a letter to the Department of Interior(126, 127);• Assistance seeking tribal recognition for one of Ring’sclients, the Mashpee Wampanoag, including meeting withthe client and having Doolittle sign a letter to theDepartment of Interior (132, 134).

LauraBlackann

• Numerousmeals, and ticketsto events fromJuly 2003 toOctober 2004,including 135.

• Assistance with a bill (FSC/ETI tax) benefitting theMunicipal Leasing Coalition, including drafting a statementon the bill’s impact on lease agreements (135).

Neil Volz • Numerousmeals, tickets toevents and tripsfrom January2000 to February2002.

• Assistance in co-sponsoring “Made in the USA” legislationproviding a benefit to garment manufacturers in the CNMI(137).

3


WilliamHeaton

• Numerousmeals, trips, andtickets to eventsfrom September2001 to October2004, including abirthday dinner atSignatures (142).

• Assistance in opposing a commission to study NativeAmerican Indian gaming, including having Ney sign a letter(139, 140, 141).

JenniferFarley

• Numerousmeals and ticketsto events, fromMarch 2002 toOctober 2004,including 144,148 and 149.

• Assistance to the Pueblo of Sandia in their land disputewith the federal government, including calling theDepartment of the Interior and a Senator to support thesettlement agreement (145, 146);• Assistance to the Pueblo of Sandia in their relationshipwith the federal government, including placing the Pueblo ofSandia on the list of tribes that the White House could workwith (150).

RobertCoughlin

• Numerousmeals and ticketsto events, fromFebruary 2001 toOctober 2003,including 155,158, 159, 161,162, 163, 171,172, 173, 175,177, 178, 181,182, 183, 186 and187.

• Assistance and information provided regarding the effortsto obtain a $16.3 million grant for a jail for the MississippiBand of Choctaw Indians, including: • meeting with other DOJ officials and lobbyists (153,154); • gathering information (156, 180), providing it to Ring,and setting up a meeting (164, 167, 168, 180); and • forwarding Congressional letters to high-level DOJofficials regarding the Choctaw jail grant (161, 162);• Assistance regarding an immigration application, includinga call to INS regarding an expedited review (184, 185, 186,187); • On multiple matters, assistance in tracking downinformation, trying to set up meetings, and determining towhom DOJ information should be shared, including: • USA Patriot Act (159) - tracking down information,contacting multiple DOJ and Senate staffers, providinginformation to Ring; and • Hopi / Navajo Land Dispute (165, 166) - tracking downinformation, contacting other DOJ officials, identifying“friendlies” and setting up a meeting with a DOJ official.

4


DavidAyres

• Tickets toevents, including170, 175, 176

• Assistance with the Choctaw jail grant, including attemptsby Ring to have him reverse the decision about the amountof the grant award and waive competitive bidding (168, 169,176).

5


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that on this 13 Day of July, 2010, I caused a true and correctth

copy of the foregoing Motion to be electronically delivered by ECF to Andrew Wise andTimothy O’Toole, counsel for Mr. Ring.

By: /s/ Nathaniel B. Edmonds NATHANIEL B. EDMONDS


Documents

U.S. v. Ring Bill of Particulars