| Page 2 of 2 < |
E-Mails in First Trial May Haunt Johnson
Charles Johnson is being tried again over advertising deals with AOL.
(By Andrew Serban -- Bloomberg News)
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
Taking the witness stand on his own behalf, Johnson testified at last week's hearing that he had been trying to help attorneys sort through complex financial data. As part of the process, Johnson said, he compiled his e-mail correspondence and relevant business spreadsheets, one of which got attached to an e-mail from April 2001 in error.
"It was a mistake," Johnson said. "I never intended for the document to be used in court."
To support his account, Johnson said that the document did not appear on an outline he had sent Burton to prepare for cross-examination of a critical witness, a fact that Johnson said cast doubt on the government theory that he had produced the material to fool the court.
At the evidentiary hearing last week, Assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy Belevetz walked Johnson through explanations he had offered for the e-mail problems, from technology issues and a misplaced attempt at humor to a desire to challenge his lawyers, who Johnson said were not keeping pace with the flow of documents in the sprawling case. "Mr. Johnson, with all these explanations you've given, what's your excuse today?" Belevetz asked.
The probe began more than five years ago, when the U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia opened an inquiry into a series of advertising deals AOL struck with business partners. Government lawyers suspected the deals were shams designed to artificially boost both companies' revenue as the dot-com bubble was bursting in 2000 and 2001.
They soon focused their attention on Johnson. The government accused Johnson of threatening employees and ordering them to destroy e-mails and computer hard drives, one of which they destroyed and spread across a backyard, according to trial testimony last year. (Two former AOL employees and a PurchasePro vice president ultimately were acquitted by an Alexandria jury in February.)
Johnson hired several lawyers to defend him, including Galanter and Burton, before returning to Galanter after Burton's withdrawal from the case last year. At the time, Burton said he based his decision on "irreconcilable differences."
