DiMasi's trial on corruption and conspiracy charges continues Monday.
Former Massachusetts House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi's trial resumes Monday.By Kyle Cheney
BOSTON — Former House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, whose trial on corruption and conspiracy charges continues Monday, is fighting an attempt by a TV station to force him to release a document detailing his financial condition.
The document, sought by Fox TV (WFXT) but currently under seal, led Judge Mark Wolf to grant DiMasi public assistance to pay for his trial counsel.
Thomas Kiley, a lawyer for DiMasi, argued in a court filing Friday that disclosure of DiMasi’s financial wherewithal would prejudice a jury, falls outside the scope of public access and violates the former speaker’s privacy.
“Mr. DiMasi’s Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial rises to the level of a compelling interest, and substantially outweighs WFXT’s claimed right of access,” Kiley wrote in opposition to Fox’s motion. “The request comes at a time when the jury is seated – not after a determination of guilt or innocence. Thus the potential for jury contamination by publicity about Mr. DiMasi’s finances (which has no bearing on guilt or innocence) is now at its zenith, as is the danger of impairing the judicial process. It also comes at a time when no billing pursuant to the appointment has occurred, so that the public’s interest in overseeing the Court’s performance of its administrative duties is at its nadir.”
Kiley and his co-counsel in the DiMasi trial, William Cintolo, received Wolf’s approval in March to work as court-appointed attorneys, funded by public dollars.
In a ruling that month, Wolf wrote, “The court finds that DiMasi is unable to retain counsel privately and that exceptional circumstances justify the appointment of his previously retained counsel.”
Wolf also ordered DiMasi to inform Kiley and the court if he experiences any “material improvement” in his finances.
Fox filed its motion two weeks ago, seeking DiMasi’s financial documents based on “public interest in the trial.”
Kiley acknowledged, in his Friday filing, that Judge Wolf has said “demonstrated willingness” to review DiMasi’s right to court-appointed counsel if “new information comes to light.”
“There is no reason to doubt that if circumstances change, judicial inquiry and public scrutiny of it may occur,” Kiley wrote. “It is not now appropriate, however.”
James Eisenberg, chief of staff to House Speaker Robert DeLeo, is expected to take the stand Monday in federal court, as the DiMasi trial launches into its third week.
Prosecutors have already previewed part of Eisenberg’s expected testimony: that in 2006, he made a notation to check with DiMasi about a budget amendment to provide funding for education data software.
That software is now the subject of intense legal scrutiny because it was eventually supplied by Cognos Corp., the company that prosecutors say DiMasi aided in exchange for $65,000 in kickbacks.
At the time the budget amendment passed providing funding for what would ultimately be a $4.5 million contract for Cognos, Eisenberg was working for DeLeo, who was then chair of the Ways and Means Committee.
Defense attorneys have attempted to block Eisenberg’s notation, claiming it is hearsay and that Eisenberg is expected to admit he is unsure of the actual meaning of the note.
In 2006, Eisenberg wrote “ck w/speaker” in the margin next to a copy of the amendment.
Prosecutors say Eisenberg will testify that he had planned to check directly with DiMasi – who was speaker from 2004 to 2009 – or with a member of the speaker’s staff about the amendment.
Also scheduled to testify Monday: Maureen Chew, the Patrick administration’s chief applications officer in the information technology Division; Barbara Martin, an accountant in the office of Richard Vitale, a codefendant in the DiMasi trial; and Louis Gutierrez, the information technology chief in the Romney administration.
DiMasi, Vitale and lobbyist Richard McDonough are charged with conspiring to steer $17.5 million in state contracts to Cognos in exchange for hundreds of thousands of dollars in kickbacks. DiMasi allegedly received $4,000 in weekly payments funneled through a law associate, eventually amounting to $65,000 in total kickbacks, while Vitale and McDonough received hundreds of thousands of dollars when Cognos successfully won Massachusetts business.
Defense attorneys have portrayed the arrangements – the fee-sharing agreement between DiMasi and his law associate, the lobbyist fees paid to McDonough and the consulting fees paid to Vitale, who once lent DiMasi a $250,000 line of credit – as entirely legal. They argued that DiMasi sought the software because it was high-quality, filled a state need and was part of an effort to improve government efficiency and accountability.