By Jennifer Bendery, GalleryWatch.com
Austin, TX –
"This particular type of case is a very lonely place to be a judge up here," said Retired Judge W.C. "Bud" Duncan of Bell County, who was charged with deciding whether Travis County Judge Bob Perkins must recuse himself as the presiding judge in the money-laundering trial of U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX). "I will make a ruling based on what counsel brings me."
Delay, who last month was indicted by two Texas grand juries on felony charges of conspiracy and money laundering tied to the 2002 Texas House races, has filed several motions that impact the nature of his trial. These include the motion being heard today to recuse Perkins and another motion requesting a change in venue.
After hours of sometimes-colorful testimony from witnesses including state Rep. Terry Keel (R-Austin) and former Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice John Hill, Duncan today granted the motion to recuse Perkins from the case. DeLay's defense team sought to remove Perkins because he has given donations to MoveOn.org and the Democratic National Committee, which defense attorneys say are in direct opposition to DeLay.
Throughout today's hearing, defense attorney Dick DeGuerin suggested that a donation is a "general expression" of support for that campaign or individual. While his intent was not to suggest that Perkins is an unfair judge, the court must "preserve the integrity of the judicial system" by removing him from DeLay's case since he "creates the appearance of impropriety based on facts in the public domain."
But prosecutor Rick Reed argued that DeLay's attorneys would have to prove that a member of the public had "a reasonable doubt that the judge is impartial" before justifying that Perkins should be removed. "Judges are presumed to be impartial." While a contribution may be a general expression of support, he stated that it does not communicate the underlying basis for that support.
Some of the more lively moments in today's hearing included when the defense team's witness James Cardle, editor of Texas Insider, noted that there are "ads supporting the Communist Party on MoveOn.org." DeLay's attorneys later noted they did not mean to suggest that Perkins endorses communism.
Regarding Perkins' donation to MoveOn.org in Sept. 2004, Reed noted that DeLay was not the only Republican actively campaigning for office at that time. "Are you aware of a presidential election" going on at that time, Reed asked. Cardle agreed that there is no way to know which individual person to whom Perkins donated his money.
Keel testified that Perkins is one of the "most intellectually honest judges" he knows but that his donations "raise concerns" about the appearance of impropriety. He said he was "surprised" to see Perkins donate money to the Texas Partnership PAC, which was set up to ensure a Democratic majority in the Texas House. This would "raise a red flag" among people involved in Texas Republican politics, said Keel.
While Keel said he believes a judge can still be fair despite giving contributions to a particular political campaign, this type of trial is a "rare animal." If Perkins were to preside over the DeLay trial, "The majority of my constituents would think it was unfair," he said.
Suggesting that both personal bias and the appearance of impropriety are present in this case, Hill stated that it is "very clear cut that you should have another judge decide this case." But when Hill reminded that recusal laws are mandatory and as such must be enforced in this case, Duncan interjected that he makes the final decisions in this case: "With all due respect, this is not the type of testimony I have to consider."
Hill continued, "Everybody knows this case is basically about politics. Tom DeLay is the poster boy" being targeted by MoveOn.org. When asked by defense attorneys if, in his opinion, Perkins creates a reasonable appearance of impropriety, Hill replied, "Beyond any question."
Texas Democratic Party (TDP) chair Charles Soechting showed little restraint in his disdain for the politics of Republican leaders. When asked if TDP sent out mailers featuring a picture of DeLay with a red bar across his face, Soechting said he didn't know of such a mailer but, referring to anti-Bush propaganda, "I have certainly seen stickers similar to it across the state."
When asked if anti-DeLay propaganda was used to raise funds on the TDP website, Soechting said there was no need to only target DeLay. Gov. Rick Perry "has been very good for us," he said. "Bush has been an excellent fundraiser for us." DeLay's attorneys noted that TDP "doesn't have many nice things to say about DeLay." Soechting replied, "I can't think of anything nice to say."
The Democratic Party chair added that it is false to assume that all the energy of MoveOn.org would be directed at DeLay since the site targets an array of social issues, including education and anti-war efforts. DeLay may have been on the site's radar, he said, "but you'd have to be in a presidential race, almost a megalomaniac, to think everything is directed at you."
Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle offered closing comments in the hearing. DeLay's attorneys suggest this is "a political case," he said. "I say it's not a political case, it's a criminal case." Earle said there is no precedent for recusal based on a judge's political contribution. Perkins' contributions are "paltry compared to what Delay is capable of," said the district attorney, whether it be "intimidating judges with whom he disagrees" or spending large sums of money "for TV ads in the last few weeks."
Earle said that, taken to the extreme, DeLay's actions would "turn us into Shiites, Kurds and Sunnis" opposing each other because of differing political affiliations. "There is no basis for that today," he said. All Americans deserve "equal justice under the law."
Ultimately, Duncan ruled that Perkins recuse himself. DeLay, who showed little change of expression when witnesses attacked his politics or his character, emerged from the courtroom holding hands with his wife with no comment.
Shortly after the ruling, Earle said he respects the judge's decision and now looks forward to addressing the next motion filed by the defense team, which seeks a change of venue for the trial.
DeGuerin emerged from the courtroom saying that today was "a fair hearing" and that the outcome of Perkins' recusal will "engender respect for the judiciary." He said he hopes to move to trial as soon as possible and anticipates a new judge being named soon. What gets lost in the shuffle of attorneys, however, is that "no crime is described by the indictments," said DeGuerin. "The quicker we go to trial, the quicker we can be done."
MoveOn.org executive director Eli Pariser said he hopes today's hearing means that the judicial system now will be allowed to focus on Delay's alleged crimes. "Tom DeLay is one of the most corrupt politicians in Washington," he said. "He's been charged with being the mastermind in a scheme to use the Republican National Committee to channel illegal corporate campaign contributions to Texas legislators. That's why he's on trial."
Pariser clarified that Judge Perkins made his $200 contribution to MoveOn.org several months after the site kicked off its anti-Delay campaign. Pariser added that he, too, is concerned about bias entering into the legal system, particularly when it relates to "the effect of the $27 million dollars Tom DeLay raised from tobacco, gas and oil companies, and other special interests."