Plaintiffs lawyers in the second Pershing Park case have filed their response to AG Peter Nickles' sworn statement submitted to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan on August 12.

Nickles' statement in which he was ordered to explain numerous discovery problems including a missing police document and faulty radio dispatches has come under heavy fire from Councilmember Mary Cheh, Councilmember Phil Mendelson, and former Councilmember Kathy Patterson. Last week, plaintiffs lawyers in the other Pershing Park case submitted their own critical take on Nickles' testimony. They have called for an independent investigation into the missing evidence.

Now comes the plaintiffs lawyers in the Barham class-action case. They too believe Nickles fell well short of an honest explanation of the case's numerous OAG-related problems. In its 32-page rebuttal, they focus particularly on Nickles' claim that he is only now just learning about the missing and/or tampered police evidence.

In fact, they argue Nickles was quite familiar with the Pershing Park case since Jan. 2007. You can read the entirety of their statement [PDF].

Read More "Pershing Park Case: Nickles Could Have Addressed Missing Evidence Long Ago" »

Today, former Ward 3 Councilmember Kathy Patterson submitted a letter [PDF] to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan regarding the troubled Pershing Park Case.

Patterson, who headed up the council judiciary committee at the time of the mass arrests and spearheaded an exhaustive investigation into the incident, may be the best authority on the subject (not including plaintiffs' attorneys).  It appears she wrote the letter to refute several assertions made by Attorney General Peter Nickles in his sworn statement turned into Sullivan on August 12.

Read More "Kathy Patterson Fact-Checks Peter Nickles on Pershing Park" »

Tomorrow, AG Peter Nickles must submit a sworn statement to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan. The statement must address issues concerning the lengthy discovery process and missing evidence in a Pershing Park case. We highlighted certain documents and testimonies concerning the missing evidence here, here and here.

Recently, the WaPo editorial board nudged Nickles to settle the Pershing Park case and figure out how critical evidence vanished. The board took great comfort in the fact that Nickles had solicited the help of retired U.S. District Court Judge Stanley Sporkin (pictured):

"It's encouraging that he enlisted former federal judge Stanley Sporkin, who is offering his considerable expertise on a pro bono basis, to advise him."

But with a day before Nickles is to turn in his sworn statement, Sporkin  says his consulting work is only just getting started. He is unclear what his work will entail. "I don't know what I'll be doing," Sporkin tells City Desk. "I'll do whatever I have to do....I really don't at this stage have any idea of where this is all going and heading....It's very new to me."

Read More "The Pershing Park Case: Judge Sporkin Starting To Get Involved, Praises AG Nickles" »

On Wednesday, a federal judge weighed in on the Office of the Attorney General's conduct in a Pershing Park civil suit. Plaintiffs attorneys alleged that critical pieces of evidence had been destroyed, doctored and lost as a result of the AG's incompetence or worse.  Judge Emmet G. Sullivan's ruling was clear: he called the evidence problems "abuse" and wondered if residents could even trust the District government.

“It raises serious questions about when, if ever, can anyone trust their government," Sullivan stated.

Sullivan promised that the sanctions he would impose would be painful. He has ordered AG Peter Nickles to submit a sworn statement explaining how the evidence could have gotten lost and turned up severely doctored. The judge also called on the D.C. Council to get involved.

Today, Councilmember Mary Cheh tells City Desk that Nickles should resign.

“I think he should resign," Cheh says. "I don’t think he should have ever been appointed...You start messing with a federal judge in a case where you are hiding evidence or destroying evidence---that’s gone to a new level.”

Read More "Councilmember Cheh Calls For Nickles To Resign" »

On Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan slammed the District's lawyers for how it has severely mishandled evidence in a civil case brought by plantiffs who were arrested in Pershing Park in September 2002.

Sullivan focused particularly on AG Peter Nickles. The Post writes:

"Sullivan ordered D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles to submit a sworn declaration detailing his office's shoddy work and the steps he was taking to fix the problems.

Sullivan said he would impose 'severe' monetary sanctions on the D.C. government and urged Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) to 'settle this case soon.' 'This kind of conduct is not acceptable,' Sullivan said, calling the actions of D.C. government lawyers 'abysmal' and urging the D.C. Council to investigate the attorney general's office.'"

You can read Sullivan's full statement to the court here. So what provoked the judge's anger?

Read More "Pershing Park Case: Now It’s All About The Cover Up; Nickles Faces Huge Test In U.S. District Court" »

"She had a nice run; now it's time to pay the piper. That's all there is to it."

That's what LL heard from a fellow spectator in Courtroom 24 of the E. Barrett Prettyman United States Courthouse this morning, while we waited for the greatest thief of public funds in District government history, Harriette Walters, to enter, along with man who had her future in his hands, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan.

Truth be told, Sullivan's role was not quite that dramatic. Walters and her attorney, Steven C. Tabackman and worked out a plea deal with federal prosecutors, so it was left to Sullivan only to decide whether Walters would get 15 years of incarceration or 18 years. Still, those three years were debated, quite passionately at times, by Tabackman, Assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy Lynch, and by Walters herself.

Walters entered the courtroom dressed in a blue garment, her hair short and braided. She wore glasses that she took off and placed on the table for most of the proceeding. At the beginning of the hearing, Sullivan brought Walters, 52, up to a podium answer a few perfunctory questions; she then sat back down while Tabackman did what he could to spare three years of her life.

Read More "How Harriette Walters Made Up For Her Crimes" »

We're here at the District's federal courthouse this morning to report on the sentencing of Harriette Walters, the central figure in the $50 million tax scam that spanned nearly two decades. Walters appeared in court wearing a blue smock, her hair short and braided. She sat behind her attorney, Steve Tabackman, who argued that his client's sentence should be on the lower end of the 15- to 18-year range laid out in the scammer's plea agreement. In a statement to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, Tabackman cited Walters' cooperation in a D.C. Council probe of the wrongdoing as the basis for his leniency request.

Speaking for herself, Walters said, "I stand before your honor in full repentance. I never blamed anyone for my part in what I did." She went on to detail the cooperation she'd given to authorities investigating the scam and insisted that without her assistance, the scam could have been perpetrated all over again.

Once Walters finished up, Sullivan said, "It's a shame you couldn't have used your talent and your brilliance to help the D.C. government."

At that, the hearing recessed. After the break, the prosecution will make its case as to why Walters should serve the max. We'll have another report later.