Mirikitani defense Jurors in the kickback trial of City Councilman Andy Mirikitani deliberate today on whom to believe: Mirikitani or the two former aides who are key witnesses against him.
denigrates witnesses
His lawyer describes
Jonn Serikawa as
"a very creative falsifier"By Gordon Y.K. Pang
gpang@starbulletin.comJohn Edmunds, Mirikitani's attorney, questioned the credibility of former Mirikitani aides Cindy McMillan and Jonn Serikawa during his closing argument yesterday. But Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Seabright said it is Mirikitani's credibility that is on trial.
Mirikitani, 45, is accused of giving $26,533.45 in bonuses to McMillan and Serikawa in exchange for $6,884 in kickbacks. He is charged with bribery, theft, extortion, witness tampering and wire fraud. Sharron Bynum, Mirikitani's 52-year-old girlfriend, is charged with aiding and abetting him.
Edmunds told jurors to be wary of the testimony given by the former aides. The two were granted immunity from prosecution, he said, and both left Mirikitani's employment on bad terms.
Edmunds said he cannot understand how McMillan could testify that she believed there would be no bonus without a campaign contribution and not understand that doing so would be a kickback.
"It didn't occur to her because she was not asked for a kickback," Edmunds said.
It was only when an overzealous FBI questioned her did her attorney, former federal lawyer Mark Bennett, tell her she had committed a felony and needed to cooperate, Edmunds said.
Mirikitani testified that he made it clear to McMillan that the bonus and the contribution were not related.
Mirikitani, who received two checks totaling $4,250 from McMillan and her husband, Karl Rhoades, waited more than a month before depositing the checks. Edmunds said that did not fit the profile of someone attempting to get away with a kickback scheme.
Yesterday, Edmunds said McMillan altered the truth by insisting Mirikitani used the word "deal" to describe the alleged quid pro quo that he requested.
"It all hinges on whether one word was used," Edmunds said.
Edmunds also ripped the credibility of Serikawa and reminded jurors of his felony drug conviction and miscellaneous misdemeanors. He described Serikawa as "a very creative falsifier" and pointed out that Serikawa did not disclose his convictions on his job application with Mirikitani.
Edmunds said Serikawa, while wearing a hidden recording device for the FBI, attempted to lure Mirikitani into discussing a kickback that never occurred.
Edmunds has insisted throughout trial that Mirikitani received no money from Serikawa. The prosecution has maintained that nearly all the $2,634 Serikawa gave to Mirikitani was in cash.
William Domingo, Bynum's attorney, also accused the prosecution of pressuring its witnesses into testifying against Mirikitani.He described the case against Bynum as circumstantial.
Seabright blasted both defense attorneys for attempting to shift the focus from Mirikitani and Bynum to McMillan and Serikawa.
"The evidence has shown a simple fact ... that Mr. Mirikitani is a corrupt politician," Seabright said.
Pointing to the defense table, Seabright said, "They're saying (McMillan and Serikawa) did nothing other than to conspire against Mr. Mirikitani."
Seabright said there is no rationale for McMillan to lie or want to see Mirikitani convicted, noting that she testified she left his employment while on good terms. "They want you to believe she made up the whole story," he said.
Seabright said that as for Serikawa, the different points of testimony Edmunds claimed he made up were too elaborate a scenario to be dreamed up. "Mr. Serikawa does not have the capacity to come up with this kind of scheme," he said.
Instead, he said, it was Mirikitani who "had sporadic and selective memory" while on the witness stand.
McMillan and Serikawa did wrong, Seabright said. "But Mr. Mirikitani is the public official who orchestrated the entire deal. He is the one who took an oath."
If convicted, Mirikitani faces up to 65 years in prison and a fine of up to $1.5 million. Bynum could be imprisoned for up to 40 years and fined up to $750,000.
Councilman Steve Holmes, who has not spoken to Mirikitani for a number of years because of a personal feud, watched the closing arguments and said he believes Mirikitani is guilty.
Holmes said that assuming Mirikitani is found guilty, Judge Helen Gillmor should speed up sentencing to avoid a problem at the nine-member council. Several news sources have reported that sentencing would not occur until at least the fall.
A convicted Council member, Holmes said, cannot be removed from office until he is sentenced.