(L-R) John Doolittle, Kerrie Ring, Kevin Ring, Julie Doolittle
The first item we'd like to point out relates to Julie Doolittle, wife of former Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.). Mrs. Doolittle held several jobs that required little or no work. One of her "employers" was Greenberg Traurig, the law firm where Kevin Ring and Jack Abramoff worked.
The government wants to introduce a letter from Mrs. Doolittle to Mr. Abramoff (Exhibit 383) into evidence. Mr. Ring and his lawyers are objects to the letter claiming that it isn't relevant. Here is how the government describes its basis for admission:
Though Ring is not on every exhibit regarding the job for Julia Doolittle, he is on several. Those he is not on, such as this exhibit in which Julia Doolittle wrote that she looked forward to working with Abramoff, place Ring's involvement in procuring the job in context and show the end result, that Abramoff in fact hired Julia Doolittle. Moreover, Ring is responsible for acts of his coconspirators taken in furtherance of the conspiracy. His coconspirators include Abramoff and Julia Doolittle.
Emphasis Added
The fact that Mrs. Doolittle has been named a co-conspirator is significant. The government basically accused Mrs. Doolittle of a crime. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean that Mrs. Doolittle will be indicted. After all, there is such a thing as an unindicted co-conspirator.
While we're on the topic of Mrs. Doolittle, we'd like to draw your attention to the government's discussion of Exhibit 328:
Moreover, the email chain begins with Ring writing to Abramoff, "[Doolittle Chief of Staff] David Lopez asked me if we had come up with anything regarding [Julia Doolittle] and employment. Ugh. Any ideas?" Abramoff replied, "Yes. Confirm with him that she only needs $2k/month and I'll set it up." The job for Julia Doolittle is central to the indictment.
Emphasis Added
[Bracketed comments in original]
[Bolded bracketed comments added]
Mrs. Doolittle's job "is central to the indictment". This echoes a statement that the DoJ made back in a February court document when the government said the payments to Mrs. Doolittle were "at the heart of the fraud".
These revelations don't bode well for Mr. and Mrs. Doolittle. Recall that the Justice Department recommended that Mr. and Mrs. Doolittle hire separate legal counsel. The ACR Blog doesn't know if the Doolittles have followed the DoJ's advice. Better late than never, we suppose.
3 comments:
Wow... I have a number of impressions from these documents. I have not had time to categorize them sufficiently so I thought I would just brainstorm a bit here. :)
1. The list sheds a bit of light on who will testify and who won't (through the inclusion of Plea documents). As you had predicted, but I had doubted, Ann Copland will indeed take the stand. Other than that, I see no surprise other than the immunity deals, which you have already covered.
2. Kevin Ring is in major trouble. This is no news, of course, but I have not realized until now just how bad it looks for him. In addition to the incriminating quotes we already knew about, we get new classics such as "Doolittle should get more dough, we need to reward our friends", "[I am] a sugar daddy so people can use and abuse me" and the short yet eloquent "damn ethics". Not to mention the book draft, which only lacks a foreword by O.J. Unless Ring pulls a giant rabbit out of his hat, I just don't understand how he can possibly expect to avoid a conviction.
3. The government has included not less eight different photos of Signatures, which seems like overkill to me. I don't think this has any significance at all, but it makes my bullet list look more impressive.
4. Exhibit 1031 relates to the Super Bowl trip in 2001. I was not aware that Ring had any involvment in that trip before.
Hey Anon,
Re the Signatures pics: could be there's 8 shots of different people IN the restaurant (fundraisers?), meaning the pics are not so much of the restaurant per se as of different people there attending different events at different times. Just my thought...
Also: It occurs to me that should the DOJ decide that prosecuting Doolittle (John) brings in too many issues (separation of powers, speech or debate, etc), they've clearly laid the basis to prosecute his wife. Not only have they named her a co-conspirator, but a great deal of additional evidence of her involvement in the scandal has been provided. How well will Mr Doolittle sleep knowing that his wife may be the one that does prison time? That his behavior, ultimately, drew his wife into this scandal and that she may be the one to do time? After all, not being a Congressperson, she can make none of the claims that her husband can.
Anon (August 13, 2009 6:07 PM):
When I saw the reference to the Signatures pictures, my thought was the same as yours. The important feature of the pictures is *who* appears in them.
Judge Huvelle is tossing out all exhibits that relate solely to fundraising. Pictures of fundraising events are most likely going to be inadmissable. That said, part of the stream of things of value public officials received. If there is a picture of a public official enjoying a non-fundraising dinner, that picture may very well remain.
I find your discussion of Julie Doolittle being an easier target than John Doolittle to be interesting. The DoJ has repeatedly played one spouse off of the other in this scandal. The DoJ may be able to force Mr. Doolittle's hand by threatening to send Julie to jail if he doesn't plead guilty to his own crimes. Is John Doolittle the kind of guy that would watch his own wife go to prison to save his own hide? We may get to find out.
Post a Comment