Judge: Stevens' Trial to Stay in D.C.
The GOP senator wanted to campaign for re-election in Alaska during his trial.
Aug. 20, 2008— -- A federal judge has rejected a request from Sen. Ted Stevens' attorneys to move the Alaska Republican's trial to his home state so he can campaign for re-election while he faces charges that he lied about gifts he received from an oil company.
A federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., indicted the 84-year-old Stevens last month for lying on financial disclosure forms he's required to file with the U.S. Senate, in effect alleging that he concealed $250,000 worth of gifts and renovations to his Girdwood, Alaska, home that were allegedly paid for by the now-defunct oil services firm VECO.
Stevens, the longest-serving Republican senator, entered a not guilty plea and the judge released him on his own recognizance. He has maintained a business-as-usual approach to campaigning but has relinquished leadership roles on the Senate Commerce Committee and the Appropriations Committee's Defense Appropriations Subcommittee in keeping with Senate rules for indicted officials.
He did not appear in court for the change of venue hearing.
In anticipation of Wednesday's hearing at the federal courthouse in Washington, D.C., Stevens' attorneys argued for the move in court documents, saying the "center of gravity" of the case lies in Alaska, that the gifts the senator allegedly received and all the key players in the case are in that state.
The monetary value of the renovations to Stevens' Girdwood, Alaska, home is "clearly in dispute," the lawyers wrote, noting that the defense team "intends to request that the court permit a jury visit to his Girdwood residence -- an option that obviously would not be convenient for a Washington, D.C., jury."
Additionally, "90 percent of the government's witnesses will be Alaska residents," the documents state.
In court, Stevens' lawyer, Brendan V. Sullivan Jr., attempted to reinforce the argument that the travel needs of a Washington-based case would be both a logistical and financial burden because of the volume of witnesses, which attorneys estimate to be about 40 people.