WINCHESTER STAR - Thomson: Devices illegally seized

Thomson: Devices illegally seized

Wants items back, says they could be used against him

By Monty Tayloe

The Winchester Star

WINCHESTER- Former city Commonwealth's Attorney Paul Hampton Thomson claims that police illegally seized several items - including a cell phone and computer - from his car during his arrest last month on charges of evidence tampering.

In a motion filed in U.S. District Court in Harrisonburg Tuesday, Thomson stated that the devices contain confidential information, and could be used by the U.S. Attorney's Office to access private e-mails between him and his defense attorneys.

In the motion, Thomson's possessions - an iPad, iPhone, and legal file - are referred to as "property impermissibly seized without a search warrant." It also states that he was arrested on Jan. 10 on the side of Interstate 81 to make the search possible.

"While the government may think it serves a purpose to intimidate and humiliate those it arrests, in this case, the stop had another purpose - to conduct a warrantless search." stated Thomson's attorney, John P. Flannery, in Tuesday's motion.

According to the motion, at the time of his arrest, Thomson was asleep in the passenger seat of his car and being driven to a hearing in Harrisonburg by a machine operator named Vernon "Duffy" Banks.

As he drove through Rockingham County, several police cars pulled Banks over. Banks woke Thomson, and both men were told to get out of the car. Thomson was immediately taken from the scene in a police car, but according to the motion, Banks was made to stay, and stand facing away from the vehicle while officers examined it.

The motion states that Banks thinks that a police dog may have been used in the search.

According to court documents, police seized several items from Thomson's car, including his briefcase, but returned everything except the iPhone, iPad, and the legal file of Oscar Salvatierra-Jovel.

Salvatierra-Jovel was a former client of Thomson's who, as a federal informant, provided the information that led to charges of evidence tampering and drug charges against him and his legal assistant, Nannette Boden.

In the motion, Thomson's attorneys claim that because no warrant has been filed authorizing the search and seizure, the items must be returned.

They specifically focus on the fact that the computer and phone could give Thomson's prosecutors access to his e-mails with his lawyers.

"We insist that the computer (iPad), iPhone, and client file contained in a closed briefcase and secured by passwords contain information and communications that may not be intercepted or reviewed by the government," states the motion.

According to the motion, the U.S. Attorney's Office has not responded to several requests from Thomson's lawyers that the items be returned.

Because of the allegedly illegal search, Flannery has asked that all evidence gathered during the search be suppressed, and has requested a hearing to determine what evidence has been "tainted" because of it.

Brian McGinn, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office, said that he had no comment on Thomson's allegations. He said prosecutors would likely respond through their own court filings.

- Contact Monty Tayloe at
mtayloe@winchesterstar.com 

NVDaily.com THOMSON'SLAWYERS SEEK CASE DISMISSAL; 2/14 HEARING SET

Thomson's lawyers seek case dismissal; Feb. 14 hearing set


http://www.nvdaily.com/news/2011/01/defense-claims-feds-mishandled-informant.php

By Alex Bridges -- abridges@nvdaily.com

HARRISONBURG -- A judge may rule next month whether to dismiss federal drug and tampering charges against embattled Winchester attorney Paul H. Thomson.

Thomson's attorneys, John P. Flannery II and J. Benjamin Dick, have accused federal prosecutors of misconduct in the handling of an informant authorities used to levy an indictment against the former Winchester commonwealth's attorney. Authorities have charged Thomson with two counts of witness tampering and one count each of evidence tampering, conspiracy to tamper with evidence, altering documents to influence a federal investigation and misdemeanor cocaine possession.

Judge James P. Jones scheduled a hearing for Feb. 14 to address the defense motions filed late Wednesday afternoon with the U.S. District Court in Charlottesville.

The defense also has asked the court to disqualify Assistant U.S. Attorney Grayson Hoffman as well as his supervisory and associate counsel "for prosecutorial misconduct."

The defense states Hoffman and Managing Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeb Terrien "encouraged and suffered false and misleading statements in court pleadings and ... misused a public defender in their 'investigation.'" The prosecutors also made themselves potential witnesses, should the case proceed, by handling an informant in a "highly questionable manner," the motion states. Terrien and his cooperating colleagues must recuse themselves from the case as a result of this conflict, according to the defense attorneys.

"Not only was this 'investigation' a case study in the impermissible excess of prosecutorial zeal, these same prosecutors, both Messrs. Hoffman and Terrien, are still handling this case, and one or both of them presented this case to the grand jury against Mr. Thomson," the defense argues. "We respectfully insist that these Assistants may not appear to prosecute a matter when they have been inextricably involved in the investigation, playing a role, indeed donning more hats than is constitutionally permissible even under the most cavalier sufferance of prosecutorial extravagance."

Thomson's attorneys leveled sharp criticism against the prosecutors' involvement in the investigation.

"We respectfully submit this is a wrongful usurpation of the law in a manner and fashion that may be unprecedented when one considers the alternative legal investigative means ordinarily available and appropriate to conduct a righteous investigation," the defense attorneys state.

Flannery and Dick cite the government's use of Oscar Alberto Salvatierra-Jovel as an informant. Salvatierra-Jovel had retained Thomson as his legal counsel for a short time before the attorney's arrest and indictment.

Salvatierra-Jovel, in an interview after his arrest, but without an attorney present, implicated Thomson in drug use but, "afterwards told a third party witness, 'They are threatening my family,'" the defense states. Salvatierra-Jovel later admitted he did not witness drug use firsthand, the motion states.

The defense argues prosecutors manipulated Salvatierra-Jovel's appointed attorney in the federal case, Frederick Heblich, to steer Thomson into taking over as the defendant's legal counsel. Thomson switched with Heblich per a court order Dec. 10.

Hoffman and Terrien, prosecutors of the Salvatierra-Jovel case, currently represent the government in the prosecution of Thomson.

ABC News: Paul Thomson Awaiting Arraignment - 1/26/11

Paul Thomson, Counsel Benjamin Dick & J. Flannery

http://www.tv3winchester.com/home/headlines/114301299.html

A Federal Grand Jury has indicted former Winchester Commonwealth's Attorney Paul Thomson and his assistant Nannette Boden with tampering and drug charges.
The Federal Grand Jury returned a seven-count indictment Thursday afternoon.
The charges include one count of conspiracy to tamper with evidence, one count of evidence tampering and one count of altering documents to influence a federal investigation.
In addition, Thomson is charged with two counts of witness tampering and one count of possession of cocaine.
Boden is also charged with one count of distributing cocaine.

Winchester Circuit Court Judge Wetsel decided Thursday to delay Paul Thomson's cases in Winchester and Clarke County until February 21, 2011.
Wetsel's ruling is limited to Winchester and Clarke County because those are the courts where he presides.
Wetsel met with Paul Thomson and his attorneys, Benjamin Dick and John Flannery on Wednesday.
Wetsel made his decision after reviewing the federal bond conditions and talking it over with the Virginia State Bar.
Thomson is facing federal charges for allegedly conspiring to tamper with evidence and a witness.

PATH request for delay in hearings denied in Va. - filed Ed Waters

A request by utilities behind the multimillion-dollar PATH project to delay the review process in Virginia has been denied.

Alexander F. Skirpan Jr., senior hearing examiner for the Virginia State Corporation Commission, ruled Monday that the request be denied and that review proceedings continue on a schedule set in October.

Allegheny Energy and American Electric Power, which are jointly planning the Potomac-Appalachian Transmission Highline, had asked Virginia officials to delay the beginning of the review until November. The utility companies said additional information would by then be available on energy demands and related factors for the 275-mile, $2.1 billion project. PATH is planned to cross three states, ending at a proposed substation near Mount Airy.
"The denial means that the proceeding will adhere to the schedule set forth by the Virginia commission in its October order, culminating in an evidentiary hearing on April 25," said Todd Meyers, a spokesman for Allegheny Energy. "We'll be reviewing the hearing examiner's ruling and will discuss the effects of the order further with the Virginia hearing examiner at a pre-conference hearing scheduled for Jan. 18."
Meyers said Allegheny and AEP remain committed the PATH project.
"The fundamental long-term need for the project has essentially remained unchanged, even as the in-service date has been pushed back several times in recent years," he said. "The regulatory process for large transmission line projects like PATH is a long road with plenty of twists and turns. It's all part of a dynamic, thorough review process."
Doug Kaplan, president of the Sugarloaf Conservancy, said he looks for PATH to withdraw its application in Virginia and refile it, as it did last year. Sugarloaf Conservancy is one of several groups, including Citizens Against the Kemptown Electric Substation and the Sierra Club, that have opposed PATH.
Kaplan said the utility companies should see this as a signal to pull the plug on PATH. PJM Interconnection, the organization that initially approved PATH and a 14 percent return on investment for the utility companies involved, should recommend an end to the project, Kaplan said.
"There is no need for PATH," Kaplan said, referring to energy demand forecasts.
The project has had opposition as well from individuals and groups that say the utility companies fail to consider alternatives to PATH. Other projects in the area, such as West Virginia's Mount Storm to Doubs system could be upgraded to provide additional power instead of the complex PATH plan.
John Flannery, a lawyer and Lovettsville, Va., resident who has spoken out frequently against PATH, called Monday's decision, "a Mexican standoff." Rather than delay the hearing process, Flannery recommends the Virginia commission deny the PATH application.
"PATH has distinguished itself as an applicant worthy of outright denial, and the commission is plainly on notice of that fact," Flannery said. "And instead of this sophistic ballet, PATH should have been shut down now."

SKIRPAN DENIES MOTION TO DELAY PATH HEARING - M. MORTON

(Created: Monday, January 10, 2011 5:23 PM EST)

 

State Corporation Commission Senior Hearing Examiner Alexander F. Skirpan Jr. today denied PATH Allegheny's request to change the procedural schedule for the renewed application to build the Virginia portion of its proposed 765kV transmission line from West Virginia to Maryland that would pass through northern Loudoun.

Ruling on arguments before him Jan. 6 in Richmond, Skirpan gave both sides a bit of what they wanted, but not all.

PATH did not get the delay it sought for the local public hearings, one of which is scheduled for Feb. 4 at Loudoun Valley High School in Purcellville, and for the evidentiary hearing April 25 in Richmond. On the other hand, he disappointed the various groups and Loudoun individuals who had requested that the application be dismissed with prejudice on grounds that it failed to demonstrate the project was needed at all or to rule it an incomplete application.
In his review of the situation, which included the request by PATH to defer the schedule only weeks after Skirpan had set the hearing dates, the hearing examiner discussed his options: to dismiss or deny the application; maintain the current schedule; or grant the application.
In establishing a "sort of Mexican standoff," as one participant termed it, Skirpan said he did not feel he had the authority dismiss or deny the application outright. He said he also thought it premature to deny the application by setting preconditions for re-applying.
Skirpan expressed concerns that the SCC could lose jurisdiction over the regulatory process to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission if the state fails to act on the application within one year of PATH's September re-application, although the company said it would not invoke FERC until after April 5, 2012. Noting there was "a risk that PATH-VA could choose not to abide by its agreement," Skirpan stated the safest alternative to prevent the SCC from losing jurisdiction to FERC was to maintain the current procedural schedule.

Skirpan ruled the current process be adhered to even though PATH representatives objected on grounds they could not comply with it.

The hearing examiner set a deadline of Jan. 18 to determine scenarios for updated load forecasts by the PJM electrical grid.
In coming to his decision, Skirpan heard arguments by a number of Lovettsville area residents, including Alfred, Irene and Theresa Ghiorzi and attorneys for a number of organizations, including the Sierra Club and the River's Edge residents, through whose properties the line would pass.
River's Edge attorney John Flannery noted Skirpan is holding PATH to a schedule the company says it can't meet, leaving it to comply or try to withdraw the application, as it did last year. Flannery said the River's Edge group feels PATH has now shown itself to be worthy of outright denial, because the new application is essentially no different from the one it withdrew last year, acknowledging at that time that energy demand projections did not demonstrate the need for the project.

What you need to know about foreclosures!



US Bancorp and Wells Fargo & Co. lost a foreclosure case in Massachusetts’s highest court that will guide lower courts in that state and may influence others in the clash between bank practices and state real estate law.   Basically, the court turned back the foreclosures because of bad paper.  Whether you are the foreclosed or the foreclosing, this is worth a look.  Read this Bloomberg account. 

John Flannery



We are waiting to hear whether PATH's toxic transmission line is dead!

We represent RIVER'S EDGE and, with other counsel, groups and citizens are fighting PATH.  PATH is a combine of utility companies that want to run a 765 kilovolt transmission power line from toxic coal generating plants in West Virginia through Virginia and Maryland.

PATH file an application in Virginia with the SCC last September over the objection of the Sierra Club, the Piedmont Environmental Council, local governments, and the landowners this line would overrun.

We charged that PATH couldn't prove we needed this line except to improve their bottom line.

In recent days, a Christmas "present" you might say, PATH asked to suspend the proceedings because, they couldn't prove need, and their application was incomplete, so PATH wanted time to get the goods they didn't have.

So River's Edge and others opposed the delay and asked to dismiss the PATH application with prejudice, based on prior rulings of the SCC and because their application was not complete.


We all appeared at a hearing in Richmond on tis past Thursday at 1pm to say just that.

Congressman Frank Wolf wrote a letter showing his support for the dismissal.

The Hearing Examiner said that he would issue a ruling by close of business Friday, or, at the latest, on Monday. 

So we're waiting to hear.

You can read more in the local papers.

But watch this space and we'll let you know what's happening.

John Flannery (JonFlan@aol.com )