Unearthed evidence produces showdown

Federal prosecutors and defense attorneys faced off in federal court Tuesday in an attempt to win the mind of the judge who will decide whether the corruption convictions against Pete Kott should be thrown out.

The former Alaska representative, convicted of bribery, extortion and conspiracy in September 2007, was freed from prison in June pending a review of withheld evidence that his lawyer claims seriously discredits Bill Allen, the feds' star witness.

Sheryl Gordon McCloud, Kott's lawyer, is asking Federal District Judge John Sedwick to use the 4,700 pages of formerly suppressed and newly discovered evidence to not only overturn Kott's convictions but to go drop the case against Kott altogether.

The documents "suggest to me that this government knowingly conducted this campaign to put perjury on the stand," McCloud argued.

Prosecutors say that while some evidence should have been turned over to Kott before his trial, no significant facts were withheld that would warrant overturning his convictions or ruling for a new trial.

The "lynch pin" in the case against Kott was 56 audio and video recordings played at his trial in which Allen and Kott discuss their "fool-proof" plan, prosecutor James Trusty told Sedwick.

"This was a case that frankly had overwhelming evidence and is not a case that should overturn the considered judgment by the jury," Trusty said.

McCloud said Tuesday that witness testimony was absolutely necessary to give the tapes context and full meaning. And with that in mind, Allen's credibility as the main witness "rounding out" the picture for the jury was crucial. Allen is the former VECO chief executive, once one of Alaska's most prominent businessmen. He cooperated with the government's corruption investigation and was sentenced to three years in prison last month for bribing Alaska politicians.

Sedwick told both sides Tuesday Kott's case is complex and he needs more time to consider what to do next. He basically has three options: Sedwick can overturn the convictions with prejudice, meaning the government couldn't retry Kott. He could overturn the convictions without prejudice, allowing the government to hold a new trial. Or Sedwick could rule that the newly revealed evidence wouldn't have changed the outcome of the trial and allow the convictions to stand.

Kott attended Tuesday's hearing with his girlfriend, daughter and son at his side. Life this summer has been spent visiting with family doing chores around the house, he said. When asked about the case, he said it grates on him, and "it's obvious [the government] didn't play fair."

Kott's fight to have his conviction dismissed has similarities to former U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens' battle with federal prosecutors. During and after his trial last year, Stevens' defense team hammered prosecutors over repeated failures to hand over evidence until the judge, angered at the botched disclosure efforts of the government, ordered prosecutors to comply.