Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Warrant in SOCom case at issue

A judge seems to think a magistrate judge wasn't given the full picture when she issued the search warrant.

By PAUL DE LA GARZA
Published April 19, 2006

TAMPA - A federal bribery case against a retired Army colonel at Special Operations Command ran into trouble Tuesday when a judge questioned the way investigators obtained key evidence.

U.S. District Judge James Whittemore gave prosecutors until Monday to submit documents showing why the evidence should not be thrown out.

He made it clear that he was not happy with an affidavit investigators used last year to persuade Magistrate Judge Mary Scriven to issue a warrant to search the Clearwater home of retired Col. Tom Spellissy.

Defense attorney Pat Doherty contends that investigators gave inaccurate information to Scriven to obtain the search warrant.

Whittemore seemed to agree, saying Scriven might not have authorized the search if she had known all of the facts.

"You can't shut your eyes and mislead the magistrate," Whittemore said, making his point repeatedly. "The Fourth Amendment was more than that."

The Fourth Amendment guards against unreasonable search and seizure.

Scriven authorized a search that yielded e-mails and bank transactions that prosecutors say are critical to proving that Spellissy engaged in a bribery scheme at SOCom.

Spellissy, now a defense consultant, helped arm special operations forces.

In applying for the warrant, Pentagon investigator Robert Calvert said Spellissy was program executive officer for special programs from April 2001 until he retired Dec. 31, 2004.

But Spellissy gave up the post July 30, 2004, according to SOCom documents and testimony in court Tuesday. The date is important because Spellissy took terminal leave after July 30 and worked as a defense consultant.

Doherty argued that investigators led Scriven to believe that Spellissy violated the law by representing a foreign company while holding his old job.

In court Tuesday, Calvert, who no longer works for the Pentagon, said investigators for the SOCom inspector general informed him of when Spellissy left his job.

He never verified the information independently, Calvert said.

In the affidavit, Calvert also said Spellissy was instrumental in submitting to Congress a request for funding a 70mm rocket warhead that would benefit his client, Nordic Ammunition Co.

Calvert did not tell Scriven that an aide to Dale Uhler, SOCom's top weapons buyer, had signed the document, not Spellissy.

The affidavit also didn't mention that Uhler authorized Spellissy to form his own company before he retired and that he was given clearance to work for Nordic Ammunition, with some restrictions.

In the affidavit, Calvert said Spellissy was banned from working for Nordic Ammunition for two years.

In response to a question from the judge Tuesday, Calvert said Spellissy did not face a two-year ban.

Whittemore told prosecutor Robert O'Neill that it did not appear that Calvert had read documents favorable to Spellissy from his superiors and an ethics officer regarding the kind of work he could do after retirement.

Calvert, Whittemore said, "had all the facts in front of him" and "could have presented it clearly."

Spellissy is accused of bribing a former SOCom official, William Burke, to receive favorable treatment in defense contracts for his clients.

Burke pleaded guilty and was sentenced to probation.

Burke was served with a subpoena to testify Tuesday, but Doherty did not call him.

He sat outside the courtroom alone, not talking to anybody.

[Last modified April 19, 2006, 01:57:07]