New York Times: Garcia made Corruption a Top Priority

In New York, Prosecutor Defends Spitzer Decision
The New York Times by BENJAMIN WEISER - November 18, 2008

Of all the important cases handled by Michael J. Garcia, who for three years has held arguably the most prestigious United States attorney’s post in the country, perhaps the one that drew the most attention is the case he did not file. In a wide-ranging interview on Monday, hours before he formally announced his resignation as federal attorney in Manhattan, Mr. Garcia defended his decision not to file criminal charges against Eliot Spitzer, who stepped down as governor in March after he became caught in a prostitution ring. “I think at the end of the day that decision is the right decision,” said Mr. Garcia, who made a name pursuing corrupt officials at the state and city level. “And it’s justice in that case,” he added. “And I stand by it.” Mr. Garcia, 47, said he would leave office on Dec. 1 and would be succeeded, at least temporarily, by his deputy, Lev L. Dassin, 43, a veteran prosecutor who will serve until President-elect Barack Obama chooses a new United States attorney for the Southern District of New York. In the interview, Mr. Garcia said that although there was evidence that Mr. Spitzer had violated the Mann Act, which prohibits transporting people across state lines for the purpose of prostitution, there were none of the other factors that traditionally weighed in favor of bringing charges, like the use of juvenile prostitutes, or commercial or other exploitation of them.

Mr. Garcia, disputing criticism in some quarters that Mr. Spitzer was selected for prosecution by Republican administration officials, reiterated what he said when he announced that he would not bring charges: His office began its investigation after learning of payments made in a questionable manner by Mr. Spitzer to a bank account in the name of a front company for the prostitution ring. “That’s how it came up,” Mr. Garcia said. “That is how it started.” The case was one of a number of public corruption investigations Mr. Garcia oversaw as United States attorney. When he took office in 2005, he said in the interview, he made corruption a top priority. “I just had a sense that we weren’t looking hard for those problems,” he said. His office has prosecuted several state politicians and city officials; former Police Commissioner Bernard B. Kerik; and Norman Hsu, the Democratic political fund-raiser. Most of those cases are still pending, with the defendants pleading not guilty. The office also brought a prosecution in connection with corruption in the United Nations oil-for-food program. Mr. Garcia said that a number of the cases exposed the need for greater transparency in how discretionary money is distributed by politicians, which he called “a vulnerability in the system.”

Mr. Garcia said the scandal over the dismissals in 2006 of United States attorneys, including some who were removed for political reasons, was extremely harmful because it could affect “the public perception of the reasons we do cases.” “It focused a light on that political process of appointing U.S. attorneys, and that was very unfortunate,” said Mr. Garcia, who was not himself one of those selected for dismissal. “Not only is it bad generally,” he added, “but it particularly undermines the message you’re sending out in public corruption cases.” Although Mr. Garcia would not discuss the details of how he decided not to charge Mr. Spitzer, he said he had made the final decision and was comfortable with it. “In making that decision,” he said, “and every decision, you try to think about the equities of the case, what would the charge be, can you make that charge, and how is that consistent with what the office does.” He added, “You try at the end of the day to do justice.” He said he disagreed with critics who suggested that the decision “gives a free pass to human trafficking.” He said that criticism was “not accurate if you look at the history of the cases we’ve done,” citing as examples cases in which the office had charged people in Mann Act cases, and in which extra factors weighed in favor of that, as with juvenile prostitutes. As a prosecutor in the 1990s, Mr. Garcia handled a series of major terrorism cases, including the 1996 trial in a foiled plot to blow up passenger jets over the Pacific Ocean. One man who was indicted but not arrested in that case was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the former senior aide to Osama bin Laden who has said he was the principal planner of the 9/11 plot.

Since there are questions about the government’s treatment of Mr. Mohammed and the future of the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, where he is being held, some have suggested trying him in federal court solely for his role in the 1990s airliner plot. Mr. Garcia said that it was impossible to predict how the legal issues would play out in such a case, but he said his office could prosecute Mr. Mohammad if that became necessary. “We make that decision that we had sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury all the elements of those crimes,” Mr. Garcia said. “We’re prepared to do that. The indictment’s still out there.” As for the current financial crisis, Mr. Garcia, whose office has major investigations under way, said the meltdown exposed a variety of schemes, like predatory lending and fraud. “The swamp is draining, and we are seeing some strange things on the bottom,” he said. Mr. Garcia, who will be joining the law firm Kirkland & Ellis, expressed concern that some people in government had raised expectations that broad indictments would necessarily follow. “This is a very serious time,” he said. “People are very nervous about the market, about the economy, about their livelihood and families. And the worst thing we could do is be alarmist on either side.” “We do what we always do,” he said. “We’ll look hard. If there are violations of the law, we’ll charge them.”