Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Judge excuses SOCom chief from court

A federal judge rules that attorneys in a bribery case must find other ways for him to testify.

By PAUL DE LA GARZA
Published April 15, 2006

TAMPA - A federal judge ruled Friday that the general who heads Special Operations Command will not have to testify in person in court.

Army Gen. Bryan "Doug" Brown has been subpoenaed to appear at a pretrial hearing Tuesday in the bribery case of retired Army Col. Tom Spellissy.

Prosecutors objected to the subpoena, saying Brown had no pertinent information on the case and that as SOCom commander his schedule was booked. Brown oversees the nation's elite commandos and the military's global war on terror.

In a two-page ruling, U.S. District Judge James Whittemore sided with attorneys for Spellissy, but said they should work around Brown's schedule and have him testify by video conference, depose him or re-evaluate whether he should testify.

Whittemore noted that defense attorneys passed up an opportunity Monday to interview Brown at SOCom, headquartered at MacDill Air Force Base. He said he did not want Brown's testimony to interfere with his military duties.

Defense attorneys have not decided how to handle Brown's testimony. They may exclude it from the hearing on Tuesday but use it for the trial, scheduled to begin May 8.

Citing an ongoing criminal proceeding, SOCom officials declined to comment.

Spellissy, a defense consultant in Clearwater, formerly worked at SOCom, helping to arm special operations forces with $3-billion in programs.

He is accused of bribing William Burke, a former SOCom official, to get favorable treatment for his clients in defense contracts. Burke pleaded guilty and was sentenced to probation.

Burke is one of several witnesses the defense plans to call Tuesday.

Whittemore scheduled the hearing on a motion to suppress evidence in the case.

Defense attorney Pat Doherty has argued that investigators used false information to get a warrant to search Spellissy's house last year.

The defense says Spellissy did nothing wrong, and that Brown initiated the investigation as a favor to a friend who was a competitor of Spellissy.

At stake, the defense argues, were hundreds of millions of dollars in future defense contracts involving shoulder-fired weapons.

An e-mail from December 2004 shows that retired Maj. Gen. Lou Hennies complained about Spellissy to Brown's executive assistant.

A separate e-mail shows that two weeks before that, a client of Hennies', Talley Defense Systems in Arizona, complained to Hennies about an Army contract Spellissy was about to receive.

The government filed both e-mails in court Wednesday as part of its motion to quash the subpoenas for Brown and other SOCom officials.

In Whittemore's ruling, only Brown was excluded.

Hennies, Brown's former superior, has not responded to several messages seeking comment.

SOCom spokesman Sam Taylor says Brown did not initiate the investigation of Spellissy.

He says the bribery charges against Spellissy were based on investigations by Pentagon investigators and the FBI.

An e-mail Dec. 6, 2004, shows deputy SOCom commander Eric Olson, a vice admiral, requested the investigation.

Doherty says the investigation would not have been started without Brown's approval.

Paul de la Garza can be reached at delagarza@sptimes.com or 813-226-3432.

[Last modified April 15, 2006, 00:51:15]