Key Evidence in Stevens Case Tossed Out

WASHINGTON, Oct. 9, 2008— -- Though a judge threw out some of the prosecution's key evidence in the corruption trial of Sen. Ted Stevens, government attorneys have been allowed to question a witness about some of the records included in that evidence.

On Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan ruled against a mistrial in the case of Sen. Ted Stevens, but he struck key evidence the government used to make its case that Stevens lied about renovations to his home in Girdwood, Alaska and other gifts he received, primarily from the former CEO of Veco, a now-defunct oil services firm.

But in nearly two hours of testimony Thursday, Dave Anderson, a former Veco employee, testified about the project to renovate Stevens' home. Anderson helped jack up Steven's home, laid the foundation for the new floor, and did the framing. Anderson also testified that he helped build an extensive deck for the house, but that he went to Portland, Ore. while another contractor did a lot of the internal finishing work on the house.

Stevens' lawyers had asserted that the government knew Anderson was in Portland, Ore., for several months even though he had submitted time sheets for work he billed as being done in Girdwood. The government had submitted Anderson's time sheets to the jury.

Defense attorney Robert Cary, having seemed to have gained a huge seed of reasonable doubt with the judge's ruling to expunge Anderson's billing records from evidence, sat looking concerned most of the morning. The defense did not cross-examine Anderson, and the prosecution has now rested its case.

Later Thurday, Judge Emmet Sullivan will tell the jury why the evidence was struck and that the prosecutors knew the information was inaccurate. The defense is up next, and is slated to call Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, and former Bush administration Secretary of State Colin Powell as character witnesses.

The mistrial request by Stevens' defense recapped the government's failure to provide them information they should have had to prepare for the trial and included allegations that the prosecutors submitted evidence they knew to be false.