Consumer advocate and presidential spoiler Ralph Nader has posted a letter to Mayor Adrian M. Fenty demanding the firing of his general counsel and acting attorney general, Peter Nickles.

Nickles has been in the news of late thanks to the resignation of former attorney general Linda Singer, who allegedly had difficulty running her office without Nickles’ interference.

The letter, signed by Nader and associate Robert Weissman alleges that Nickles “on several occasions engaged in extracurricular activities beyond his job description — and exceeding his authority.”

Even more seriously, he blocked numerous ideas from your Attorney General Linda Singer and her associates to initiate aggressive litigation strategies to hold corporations accountable for harming District residents and depriving the District government of tax revenues. Perhaps Mr. Nickles’ experience as a career corporate litigator with Covington & Burling actually interfered with his “good judgment” in these cases.

Nickles was back in the news today for firing Alan Morrison, whom Singer had tapped to argue the District’s case before the Supreme Court on the handgun ban. That seems to have been the proximate reason for the letter.

Full letter after the jump.

Read the rest of this entry »

An MPD officer shot and killed a D.C. family’s dog on Christmas Eve, Fox 5 is reporting. Stories about pets who are shot to death seemingly write themselves. Still, Fox 5 has outdone itself by managing to recover possibly the most sympathetic accompanying photograph ever:

This shooting victim isn’t just adorable doggy; he’s an adorably patriotic doggy. An internal investigation into the incident is pending: The officer claims Scooby lunged, while the dog’s owner says Scooby was sitting still. Now, I’m no police investigator, but the only photograph of Scooby I’ve ever seen is of him sitting still, lovin’ the U.S. of A. I rest my case.

Peter Nickles, general counsel for Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, usually relishes a low-key, behind-the-scenes approach in his dealings as the mayor’s consigliere. But this week Nickles has had to deal with a lot more attention than he’s used to in the wake of Attorney General Linda Singer’s resignation on Monday.

He’s kept pretty quiet since then. LL caught up with Nickles in his Wilson Building office today on his way out to lunch and had a brief conversation with the man about the proper roles of the attorney general and the general counsel.

“I think among adults, the distinction is pretty clear,” Nickles said. That distinction, he explained, lies in which legal matters lie in the realm of policy and which matters have more to do with enforcement.

“It’s always been clear in matters of policy,” said Nickles. “Policy has to be vetted with the mayor and the senior staff….We need vigorous discussion.”

Matters of law enforcement, Nickles said, need to be dealt with more independence from the mayor. “You don’t pull your punches on law enforcement,” he said.

“Good lawyers understand the distinction,” he said.

Nickles went on to explain that the division of labor is inherently fuzzy in an administration with an attorney general appointed by the mayor. An elected attorney general, he said, wouldn’t have the same turf problems: “They run on a platform…and those guys don’t consult on anything,” he said, citing former New York AG and now Gov. Eliot Spitzer.

Nickles expressed tentative support for the District electing its attorneys general, but that would require Congress to amend the Home Rule Act, and Nickles discounted the chances of that happening any time soon. “If we ever have Congress move into the 20th century, we’d have a little bit of home rule,” he says.

District Attorney General Linda Singer has resigned, the Washington Post is reporting.

The Post, unsurprisingly, attributes Singer’s decision to frustration over her role vis-a-vis Fenty General Counsel Peter Nickles, a longtime family friend whose office is just around the hall from Fenty’s bullpen on the third floor of the Wilson Building. Nickles has been heavily involved in just about every major executive branch legal maneuver since the beginning of the Fenty term, including negotiating several major court settlements and the sale of Greater Southeast Community Hospital.

Singer, on the other hand, seemed to have been relegated to comparatively penny-ante affairs. A glimpse at her office’s press page reveals a whole lot of scofflaw-property shutdowns and consumer-affairs business. That’s not without certain exceptions: Singer, for instance, has served as the District’s point person on preserving the handgun ban before the Supreme Court.

Nickles, unsurprisingly, has been named interim AG.

Big question: Does this mean Nickles will actually be moving to the District? A bit of controversy erupted when Nickles declined to move from his suburban Virginia home into the District after being named general counsel. The city argued that Nickles’ position was required to be D.C.-domiciled under the law, but the AG’s spot certainly is.

Singer’ resignation letter, in full, after the jump.

Read the rest of this entry »

My brother’s in town from Chicago, and last night I was driving him to his hotel room. We went down Wythe Street in Old Town, not far from where our parents used to live, on North Columbus, and we were remarking on how odd it was to see white people walking their dogs on Wythe Street in Old Town at 11:20 p.m. We got to his hotel, realized he’d left his bag at our place, and went back home, back up Wythe. A block before the Metro stop, I heard a THUNK against the rear gate of my Toyota, then saw some kids running away. I got out and saw I’d been egged! On the way back to the hotel, my brother and I drove slowly down the block, looking to jump out and try to scare the behayzeus out of the kids. He rolled up—this is so embarrassing—the current issue of the City Paper, Jason Bourne–like, to resemble a weapon. We rolled past the low-rises, but it was all getting a bit Herc and Carver, and anyway, lucky for us, we never found ‘em. I’m pretty sure if we ran at those kids they’d just laugh at the old guys wielding newspapers. Our bluff called, we’d be forced to retreat to the omeletmobile.

It was a real pain to scrub the egg off the back. That stuff dries quickly.

I checked in with local attorney Bruce M. Cooper to get the rundown of how he and other attorneys are coping with Superior Court’s cafeteria closing. The closing is a big deal for the attorneys who use the place everyday. And their clients desperate for a little time to discuss their case. Seating–let alone privacy–are now luxuries.

“I keep on wanting to tell clients to meet me in the cafeteria and there’s no cafeteria,” Cooper says. “There’s really no meeting space. It’s a real scramble to find some place.”

Cooper goes on to say: “I had nine people up in court yesterday. .We couldn’t find a place to sit down.” They ended up using one of the small rooms just outside the courtroom. Even those rooms are usually hard to come by–as they are either occupied by slumbering cops just coming off midnight shifts or prosecutors. The rooms themselves are small and usually contain just three or four chairs.

The other problem Cooper noticed is with arraignment court. Families are told to be there at 8:30 in the morning. Arraignment court–or C10–isn’t open until 11, Cooper explains. So now instead of sitting in the cafeteria, the families must crowd around C10 for hours before its doors open. Sounds like fun.

“So far no one has discovered a secret space,” Cooper says.

Last week, Cooper adds, the vending machines outside the shuttered cafeteria were broken.

Let the briefin’ and arguin’ begin.

You, District citizen, will be able to own a legal handgun by midsummer.

Fenty presser 3 p.m. at Wilson Building. Police chief Cathy Lanier and Attorney General Linda Singer will be there, too.

By now, you’ve gotten the broad strokes of the $16 million-plus tax-refund scam—alleged to be the greatest theft in D.C. government history. You’ve heard how Office of Tax and Revenue employees Harriette Walters and Diane Gustus, along with conspirator Jayrece Turnbull and others, cut themselves huge tax refund checks and spent it on fur coats, jewelry, and a 2005 Bentley.

But how exactly did the scam go down? At yesterday’s press conference, prosecutors and investigators were understandably tight-lipped with details, but the charging documents are always good for filling in the gaps. Here in PDF format, for your reading pleasure, is an affidavit compiled by FBI Special Agent Matthew T. Walsh to support the search and arrest warrants executed yesterday.

There’s some sweet reading in there. Some of the highlights:

Page 4: Besides Walters and Fustus, there are five additional, unnamed D.C. government employees mentioned in the affidavit—all work in the Office of Tax and Revenue. At yesterday’s press conference, U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Taylor refused to comment on whether more arrests are to come, citing the ongoing investigation.

Page 7: “[S]ome of the money stolen from the District of Columbia has been sent to a money exchange institution in the Dominican Republic that has no bank branches in the United States.”

Page 8: “[T]here is probable cause to believe that the scheme has generated at least 42 fraudulent checks, with a financial loss to the District of Columbia of more than $16 million. That amount may continue to grow as the investigation continues and additional fraudulent checks are discovered. Moreover, of that $16 million, less than $2 million in bank accounts have been located thus far.”

Page 10: The checks weren’t sent out by mail, but typically labeled “Hold for Pickup.” When picking them up, Walters signed for many of the checks that she had approved.

Page 13: A $350,000 check was authorized to refund taxes on a piece of propety that doesn’t even exist. A property referenced in the attached “Refund Research Form,” however, does: the Omni Shoreham Hotel. More than $200,000 ended up in Walters’ bank account.

Page 17: A $330,000 check also refunded taxes on a nonexistent property. It was actually made out to a legitimate building owner, “BGW LLP.” There’s no explanation why Bank of America would have deposited it.

Page 27: The check that brought the whole scheme down. Based on Walters’ approval, a $410,000 check made out to “First American Home c/o David Fuss” was issued on May 23 this year. The same tax payment checks included as supposed evidence of overpayment had been included on four other refund vouchers approved by Walters as well.

Page 29: In June, Turnbull deposited the $410,000 at a SunTrust bank branch in Bowie, Md. Later a SunTrust employee actually called up David Fuss, who’s a real estate lawyer with Wilkes Artis. He told the bank that he had no idea what this check was or who First American Home is. On July 9, a SunTrust employee met with Turnbull and asked for references to prove she was authorized to accept checks made out to First American. Says the affidavit: “TURNBULL accused the SunTrust Bank employee of illegality but nevertheless stated that the nature of her business was making investments in real estate and vacation property rentals abroad.”

Page 30: SunTrust wanted corporate docs, so Turnbull got some corporate docs: She went to the Prince George’s County courthouse and filed a trade name application for “First American Home.” She sends the application documents to SunTrust, and, yes, they notice she filed for the trade name a day after they asked for it—and two weeks after the check was issued. Then, in September, still trying to convince SunTrust she was on the level, she gave then a letter on D.C. government letterhead signed by one of the unnamed co-conspirators vouching for her as a “fully registered” tax sale purchaser. Still wasn’t good enough for SunTrust.

Page 33: The biggest check fraudulent detailed in the affidavit: $459,990—prepared by Gustus and approved by Walters.

Page 37: Walters, on three occasions, wrote letters to the District’s check-issuing office asking for “expedited payment” on fraudulent checks. When they were ready, they were to be held for pickup, and Gustus or one of the unnamed coconspirators was to be contacted.

Page 39: Turnbull had the help of a Bank of America employee, whom she had authorized to make withdrawals, deposits, and transfers without her being present. Needless to say, that’s not B of A policy. Probably neither is accepting $145,000 in “gifts” from Turnbull, which he did. The employee was fired in February.

Page 43: In early July 2006, Gustus bought a new GMC Envoy for $40,456, for which she took out a six-year $35,000 loan. She paid off the loan within a year.

Whoa. Even by the lofty standards of public corruption in this town, this one is staggering.

According to a Washington Post story posted a few minutes ago, federal prosecutors this afternoon will be filing charges against Harriette Walters and Diane Gustus, officials in the Office of Tax and Revenue, for embezzling some $14 to $20 million in an elaborate money laundering scheme.

Key line: “Law enforcement sources said the sheer size of the theft will rival any previous D.C. corruption case.”

Wow.

New evidence is heaping even more doubt on the already dubious case against the West Memphis Three, the three teenage boys convicted of mutilating and killing three eight-year-old boys in 1994. Prosecutors offered no DNA evidence linking the boys to the murder, and the convictions–which resulted in two life sentences and one seat on death row–were based largely on a confession full of factual errors. Two HBO documentaries have made the case a cause celebre for railroaded justice.

Now defense attorneys have introduced actual physical evidence, which suggests that animals were responsible for the mutilations — and that at least one other person was present at the scene of the crime.

Through it all, prosecutors have stood by their case. The boys are just too appealing as suspects. They were outcasts, read Stephen King, and listened to heavy metal. Obvious proof of cult membership.

The case reminds me of the mind-blowing extent to which average Americans fear teenagers who listen to goth and metal. What is it? The Satanism? The potential of turning kids gay? Most of the metalheads I knew in high school were pretty dweeby. They were into poetry and philosophy and Star Wars. They weren’t exactly joiners, and they cultivated the whole depression thing. Some were cutters. (Actually, the worst cutter I knew was a Mormon girl who used to make out with a life-sized poster of Bon Jovi.) I didn’t know any who were even remotely violent. I did know a few jocks, though, who listened to nice, parent-friendly bands like the Eagles, who beat up my friends and not-gray-raped cheerleaders. The fact that some of the shooters in recent school tragedies listened to heavy metal — a point always noted as synonymous with violent tendencies — to me just underscores the fact that some high schools are highly intolerant places.

I almost thought this Web site was for real.

In a hearing this afternoon, Superior Court Judge Melvin R. Wright strongly criticized the District for failing to comply with a 2003 law requiring the city to cap the D.C. Jail population.

The agony over the D.C. Jail’s population dates back to at least 1975, but this particular conflict has its roots in a law passed by the D.C. Council in 2003 that required the mayor to “establish by rule the maximum number of inmates to be held at any one time” at the jail. A consultant hired by the city in spring 2004 to determine the number came back with a range between 1,958 and 2,164 inmates.

Still, the recommendations in hand, the city did nothing. Now, a suit filed in 2005 seeking to have the city comply with the 2003 law has finally come to a head; in August, Wright granted summary judgment and ordered the District to set a cap in writing by today’s hearing.

Well, set a cap the city did: In a filing earlier this week, the city announced its intention to set the cap at 3,198 inmates—more than 1,000 above what its own consultants recommended as an upper limit for the jail population.

Plaintiffs’ lawyer Theodore A. Howard called the figure “a number that has no relation to anything.”

Earlier the attorney general’s office had argued that separation-of-powers issues prohibited the Council from setting a cap—specifically that the cap inhibited the mayor’s power to “allocate resources” as he sees fit.

Wright showed little patience with the city’s arguments in today’s hearing. “I don’t understand at all the Distict’s position,” he said.

City attorney Andrew Sandon Saindon said, “It’s a political decision. It’s a dispute between the executive and legislative branch.” Wright took the opportunity to give the courtroom a civics lesson and ask Sandon why, if the executive branch had such a big problem with the bill, didn’t the mayor veto it.

Wright said the District’s argument have “no merit” and gave the city until next Friday to comply by submitting a number within the suggested range—”not an arbitrary number that you think you can justify”—lest it face contempt-of-court proceedings.

“The District of Columbia…has the same obligation to obey the law that any individual citizen does,” Wright told Sandon. “The fact that the mayor or the Department of Corrections doesn’t like the legislation is not a reason not to obey.”

Deborah Golden, a lawyer with the D.C. Prisoners’ Project, which is helping to litigate the case, expects the city to take their arguments to the D.C. Court of Appeals, further delaying the implementation of a meaningful cap. “We’re frustrated,” she says, “that this will take more time.”

CORRECTION, 10/8: Due to an error by reporter Mike DeBonis, city attorney Andrew Saindon’s name was misspelled.

I am happy that Knicks marketing exec Anucha Browne Sanders won her high-profile sexual harassment suit against her employer. Having monitored the case with great interest, I concluded that she was harassed, that the Knicks and Madison Square Garden are bad places to work, that Stephon Marbury is gross, that it’s no more appropriate for a black man to call a black woman “bitch” than it is for any other individual, that people in professional sports by and large suck, and that the Knicks training camp isn’t off to a fast and focused start. I’m also happy that Anucha is getting more than $11 million in damages.

Where I get off the Anucha bus is just before this statement, which she made after the verdict. From the Washington Post: “‘What I did here, I did for every working woman in America,’ Browne Sanders said outside the court after the verdict. She added that she pursued the case ‘for everyone who doesn’t have the means to do what I was able to do.’”

Why is it that every time someone gets involved in some lawsuit, they’re suddenly a popular hero?

She filed the suit because she was harassed. A jury agreed. A big, rich, and powerful organization, full of very arrogant jerks, got taken down. Hell, that’s good enough for me.

But just how do the benefits trickle down to the everywoman? Is Sanders prepared to share her payout with the rabble, to finance sexual harassment suits that she finds meritorious? I haven’t heard of any such plans. Did the case plow new ground, somehow, that’ll make it easier for other women to get redress for their grievances? I haven’t heard Stuart Taylor say so.

Lawsuits are long, exhausting affairs that amount to hand-to-hand combat via keyboards and depositions. So I guess it’s no surprise that people invest a great deal of symbolism and principle in their causes. After all, Roy Pearson, the pants lawsuit guy, the one who sued his dry cleaners for gazillions, claimed that his famous frivolity was not about the money but about principle.

Over the summer, I met Supreme Court lawyer Tom Goldstein, and since then, I’ve been looking for some reason to write about him. Today, finally, I get my chance.

There are several reasons why Goldstein is pertinent to this blog:

1. He resides in Washington D.C. (usually reason enough for a post).
2. He wrote a big story on Slate.com about the Supreme Court’s upcoming term, which may include the famed DC handgun ban case, District of Columbia v. Heller.
3. As lawyers go, Goldstein has a pretty crazy story: Though he was a big-time debater in college (University of North Carolina), he was a mediocre student who got rejected from every law school he applied to. Luckily, he had a relative who worked at the law school at American University. So, he got in. He argued his first case before the Supreme Court when he was 28. Shortly thereafter, he left his firm and, with his wife, started a boutique practice, specializing in the Supreme Court. (The main office was the family laundry room.) To make a long story short: Goldstein is one of the top Supreme Court lawyers in the country, having argued 17 cases at the ripe age of 37. He currently heads up the Supreme Court practice at Akin Gump in the District. He also runs scotusblog.com.

But what clinches the deal (the deal in which I say to myself: OK, now this sounds blogworthy) is that Goldstein’s firm is representing the District in the handgun ban case, and his Slate piece includes interesting thoughts on the case’s future. Goldstein says that there’s no precedent for a case like this to hint at the justices’ ruling. “Still, the district has a cascade of arguments for reversal. And the decision is likely to break down along ideological lines, with the four members on the left of the court advocating against gun rights.” Goldstein goes on to say the case could have far-reaching political repercussions: “The success of the NRA shows that there is a significant portion of the population that favors and mobilizes around gun rights. The court’s decision could have a profound effect on whether those voters go to the polls. By contrast, those who favor greater gun regulation overwhelmingly are not ’single issue’ voters.”

So, glad I could share.

The infamous pants suit isn’t going away, but Custom Cleaners, the dry cleaning business in Northeast where the Chung family may or may not have misplaced Judge Roy Pearson’s pants, is changing hands.

In a press release this morning, Christopher Manning, the attorney who represents the Chungs, announced the store has been sold “due to the revenue losses and emotional toll resulting from the Pearson v. Chung lawsuit.”

It was the second store the Chungs have closed since Pearson filed his $54 million lawsuit. Pearson lost the case in June but has filed an appeal. The Chungs will continue to run Happy Cleaners on 7th Street NW, according to the press release.

It’s people like Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. Without him, we’d be Baltimore or Philly—just any other big city that’s not New York or Los Angeles. But we have Mitch. With folks like the Republican from Kentucky, we get to do all sorts of things like create nifty license plates, and do fun stuff like rally in front of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to be allowed to have a real vote on farm bills, transportation infrastructure, and spy programs.

The D.C. Voting Rights Bill faces a critical Senate vote today. This morning, the Washington Post wrote a piece on Fenty’s last-minute efforts, which included a rally at the Capitol. In the story, McConnell was quoted saying something only a long-time politician could get away with:

“The right to vote is fundamental, and I will fight any attempt to dilute or impede that right,” McConnell said on the Senate floor, in a speech distributed by his press office. “My opposition to this bill rests instead on a single all-important fact: It is clearly and unambiguously unconstitutional.”

To read the good Senator’s full remarks go here.

Again, this is what makes D.C. special. Be proud, District residents. Without McConnell, where would we be? What would we be?

I think McConnell’s office needs some angry phone calls (202-224-2541). Or at least a little Borf.