WSB's Veronica Waters reports Campbell was found guilty of three counts of tax evasion, but acquitted of racketeering and three allegations of accepting corrupt payments. Some jurors told the AJC there was confusion over the date of an alleged bribe from Campbell's golfing buddy, Dan DeBardelaben, who said he provided a trio of payments to the Mayor in the summer of 1999.

Prosecutors said the confusion over the date, combined with a lack of evidence showing Campbell deposited the cash, was "devastating" to the case.

But defense attorney Jerry Froelich thinks that's just spin.

"There were three different dates—specific dates—one, the judge charged them 'on or about.' So I don't believe this stuff about, 'Oh, it was a different date.' Second of all, there were specific dates on all other 10 racketeering charges, and he was found not guilty on all those."

Campbell was actually convicted of Racketeering Act 10, which accused him of defrauding campaign donors and creditors by holding "retire the debt" fundraisers after his 1997 re-election, but then using the funds for personal expenses without completely paying off creditors. There was testimony that the money was used for sporting event tickets, credit card and cell phone bills, and reward funds, but that three creditors--a law firm, a poster company, and a car company--were left settling for less than the total amounts they were owed.

Campbell had to be convicted of two racketeering acts in order to be convicted on Count I of the indictment.

Jurors reportedly said because the indictment said an alleged bribe was "on or about" June 9, and travel records showed Campbell was away on that date, they acquitted on Racketeering Act 2. DeBardelaben testified that he delivered the payment on the 8th, and detailed a series of phone calls between himself and the Mayor that day.

U. S. Attorney David Nahmias says the Court had defined 'on or about' as meaning the alleged payment had to have occurred near the specified date. He acknowledges, too, that there were two other possible DeBardelaben bribes available for the jury's conviction.

"They could've," Nahmias tells WSB, who says he didn't speak much with the jurors. "My understanding is that kind of when they thought that the first date was at question, they kind of read that against DeBardelaben for the other transactions. So that was the focus of that."

Nahmias says jurors had issues with some of the other witnesses' credibility, because several of them had received plea or immunity deals.

"The jury took into account the fact just the fact that the witnesses all had issues and the amounts were not specific," he says.

Froelich says jurors, faced with four prosecutors in the moments after the verdict, may have been hesitant to say all the reasons they acquitted.

"This is an attack by the Government on...the jury, who worked very hard and took copious notes. Because they didn't find Campbell guilty, then they're idiots, or they've been confused, or anything. It's outrageous."

Froelich says he still considers the prosecutors friends, but finds their message offensive.

"It is offensive that when the Government loses, when they allow perjury and other things like that on the stand and the jury recognizes that, that they come back and try to justify it.

Froelich says he respects the jury's hard work, "and they convicted my client, so I have a reason to say otherwise."

What Will Campbell's Sentence Be?

It will likely be a couple of months before the Government's pre-sentencing report, which will show the sentence recommendation for Campbell, is finished.

A noted Atlanta attorney who was on Campbell's defense team until last September says there will be wrangling over the sentence, but it is unlikely the former mayor will get the max behind bars. The defense, he says, will ask for lenience by highlighting the sentences for others whose level of unreported income is similar to Campbell's.

"I think he stands a shot—although it is somewhat of a long shot—to get probation," Steve Sadow tells WSB. "I think it depends a long way on the way the sentencing presentation is made, and how Judge [Richard] Story sees the overall case."

Campbell's friend, Fred Prewitt, served six months for tax evasion. At Campbell's trial, prosecutors showed that Prewitt made over $800,000 lobbying for companies seeking to do business with Atlanta. He later admitted posing as a front for firms needing to partner with minority-owned businesses to compete for contracts with the city.

U. S. Attorney David Nahmias says the level of prosecuted unreported income for Prewitt was in the $400,000-range, and that Prewitt also got a sentencing benefit because he pled guilty.

Story has the option to use "the preponderance of evidence" when announcing Campbell's sentence.

"It permits the judge to use acquitted conduct, which means since the burden of proof is heavier to find someone guilty than it is to use it under the sentencing guidelines, he could be acquitted but the evidence could still be enough for the sentence to be imposed as if he were convicted," says Sadow. He points out, however, that Story is a "phenomenal and fair judge" who is likely to give a lot of weight to the jury's verdict.

Campbell's trial, originally scheduled for September, was postponed until January when Sadow left the case and Washington-based attorney Billy Martin took over. Sadow says watching the trial from afar, he feels "both sides did a fabulous job."

"I would say that at this point, the Campbell camp has won the battle. Now the question is, will they win the war? The war in the criminal defense arena is always whether your client goes to jail or doesn't go to jail. There's no such thing as a partial victory in your client going to jail. That's the way we look at it."

Monday, March 13, 2006