Trial shakes halls of power

Jeff German and Steve Kanigher

Sunday, May 7, 2006 | 9:05 a.m.

The bribery convictions of two former Clark County commissioners this week sends an unsettling double message to other public officials who crossed paths with Michael Galardi, the strip club owner turned government witness..

First, jurors believed that while Galardi exaggerated the number of public servants he bribed, he had enough credibility to convict elected officials in Clark County-as he did in San Diego.

As explained by juror Steve Janicki, a six-year Las Vegas resident who retired from IBM: At times the jury believed Galardi, at times its members did not. "It was a little bit of both," Janicki said. But overall, he said, jurors found the government's central witness credible.

The second part of the message is that the federal investigation of public corruption in Nevada now has new momentum.

"The investigation continues," U.S. Attorney Daniel Bogden told reporters Friday following the convictions of former County Commissioners Dario Herrera and Mary Kincaid-Chauncey on charges relating to taking bribes from Galardi.

The words themselves were coolly detached. But the body language left no doubt that the U.S. investigation is newly invigorated. Bogden borrowed a phrase from President Theodore Roosevelt, who said: "The first requisite of successful self-government is unflinching enforcement of the law and the cutting out of corruption."

Bogden told reporters that the verdict shows the public wants corrupt politicians removed from office.

"The jury came back, looked at the evidence and said, 'We're not going to take this anymore,' " he said.

Bogden would not comment on other potential corruption targets. Galardi, one of the chief witnesses at the two-month trial of Herrera and Kincaid-Chauncey. has provided federal authorities with a list of dozens of additional public officials and law enforcement authorities he allegedly corrupted, although it would be farfetched to believe some of the names on the list were bribed.

County Manager Thom Reilly, for instance, testified during the trial that he did not receive $5,000 under the table from Galardi, as Galardi claimed. And even Galardi admitted under oath during the trial that other names on his list, including County Commissioners Yvonne Atkinson Gates and Lynette Boggs McDonald, were not bribed by him.

Galardi did not deny giving illicit cash and favors to former City Councilmen Michael McDonald and Michael Mack.

In his interviews with FBI agents three years ago while he struck a deal to cooperate, Galardi offered to help agents gather evidence on both politicians. McDonald was a paid Galardi consultant while in office, and Mack was a frequent visitor to one of Galardi's strip clubs, Cheetahs, where, according to Galardi, he allegedly sought sexual favors. Galardi even agreed to wear a wire to set up Mack for the FBI. The sting was called off at the last minute after negotiations between the topless club owner and the FBI broke down.

Another resource for federal authorities in their continuing investigation is former County Commissioner Erin Kenny, who testified for the government at the trial. She has pleaded guilty to taking bribes from Galardi, and she is cooperating with authorities. Much of what she has told FBI agents has not been made public, but she had ties to several prominent developers while in office.

Friday's conviction of Herrera and Kincaid-Chauncey also changed the landscape for the lone remaining defendant, former Clark County Commissioner Lance Malone. He now faces added pressure to strike a deal with federal prosecutors before his Aug. 29 trial on charges of acting as Galardi's bagman, sources close to the case said.

Prosecutors would just as soon avoid another costly and extensive trial, and armed with the convictions in San Diego and Clark County, they can argue persuasively that Malone should plead guilty to charges because he's backed into a corner.

The question for Malone's attorneys is whether they've waited too long to cut a deal. Months ago, prosecutors had two reasons to bargain. They wanted to avoid the hassle and expense of a trial, and Galardi's credibility had not been tested in Clark County. Now, they know jurors believed Galardi. So the only reason for them to deal with Malone now is to clear the case from the trial docket.

That leaves Malone in a weaker position, said Craig Walton, president of the Nevada Center for Public Ethics. "I don't know what he's got to trade," Walton said. "I'm not sure he's got something to bargain."

At the very least, the guilty verdicts hurt Malone's chances of defending himself at trial, said Charles Kelly, a criminal defense lawyer and former federal prosecutor.

"There's no question about that," Kelly said. "The government had a snapshot of how Galardi can be impeached, and now they'll be in a position to shore up those problems."

Malone's attorney, Dominic Gentile, declined to comment on what effect the guilty verdicts might have on Malone's case.

But Gentile said: "Clearly the defense that was put on at this trial will not be the same defense I'll put on at trial."

Gentile also said he will seek a change of venue.

"My concern is that there has been so much media attention paid to the case," he said. "I doubt we'll get a jury that hasn't paid much attention because of all the trial publicity and post-trial publicity.

"I think it's 100 percent ... I will try to have the case moved."

Gentile also said he does not believe that Friday's verdicts boosted Galardi's credibility.

"It says nothing about how Galardi did as a witness." he said.