Wednesday, Sept. 15, 2004 | 11:07 a.m.
New questions about Michael Galardi's credibility in the government's political corruption investigation have surfaced.
But this time the criticism isn't coming from defense lawyers paid handsomely to attack the government's case. It's coming from the very government that made the former strip club owner a star witness in the probe.
An internal Justice Department inquiry, according to a long-awaited summary, was unable to corroborate Galardi's claims of providing favors ($500 for drinks and lap dances at Cheetahs) to the prosecutor who once directed the corruption investigation. The prosecutor is veteran Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Johnson, a straight arrow if there ever was one, who has publicly denied the allegations.
In a candid admission, the four-page summary says the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility in Washington found "Johnson's denial of the allegations to be credible and Galardi's credibility to be suspect."
It's an intriguing conclusion that's allowing defense lawyers to continue firing away at the government's corruption case against the politicians accused of taking money under the table from Galardi. County Commissioner Mary Kincaid-Chauncey and former commissioners Dario Herrera and Lance Malone are facing corruption charges.
The Justice Department summary, which was turned over to defense lawyers last week under orders from a federal judge, is starting to make the rounds within the defense community.
The spin being put out is that it's evidence the government itself has trouble believing Galardi.
Word even has been bandied about that federal prosecutors now have concerns about Galardi's value as a courtroom witness.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Dan Schiess, the lead prosecutor in the case, wouldn't talk about that.
But even if it's true, prosecutors still have plenty of other evidence, such as two years of court-approved wiretaps and at least one other star witness, former County Commissioner Erin Kenny. Wiretaps are generally persuasive in front of juries, so prosecutors would appear to be in good shape if they end up distancing themselves from Galardi.
In the meantime defense lawyers aren't letting up on the former topless nightclub kingpin.
In a 16-page affidavit unsealed last week, attorney Dominic Gentile, who represents Malone, charged that Galardi misled the government into thinking Gentile had a conflict of interest in the case because he once represented Galardi.
Gentile insisted there was no conflict and that Galardi was lying as part of a bigger plan to persuade Malone to cooperate with the government. Gentile charged that Galardi was desperate for Malone to back up his allegations to improve his standing with skeptical prosecutors.
During a bizarre meeting at the Sterling Club on April 14, Gentile said, Scott Scarborough, a private investigator for Galardi, told him that Galardi needed Malone's help to get a better deal for himself.
Galardi had arranged to meet Malone at the Sterling Club that day, but Gentile went in Malone's place. Scarborough told Gentile that Galardi got a call from a Justice Department bigwig in Washington on the way there to stay away from the meeting.
My guess is we haven't heard the last of that incident, which means we also haven't heard the last of the questions about Galardi's credibility.
archive
