New Orleans 1st Logo

Longer prison term urged in bribe case after Thomas refuses to 'rat,'

Section: Politics

Gordon Russell

New Orleans City Councilman Oliver Thomas violated the terms of his plea agreement by refusing to "rat" on others involved in public corruption and should face a longer prison term than the 30 to 37 months recommended in federal sentencing guidelines, federal prosecutors argue in a new court filing.

After signing a plea agreement in which he promised to cooperate with authorities, Thomas told FBI agents and federal prosecutors during his second debriefing session that he "did not wish to be a 'rat,' " according to the sentencing memorandum filed by U.S. Attorney Jim Letten's office. Thomas then refused to discuss his possible knowledge of other crimes, according to the memo.

Thomas, who pleaded guilty in August to accepting bribes then resigned his office, is scheduled to be sentenced today at 10 a.m. by U.S. District Judge Sarah Vance. Judges are no longer required to abide by federal sentencing guidelines when imposing sentences, but they often use them as a benchmark.

By law, the maximum sentence the former councilman could face is 10 years.

The prosecution's memo, which became public Tuesday, makes it plain that federal authorities believe Thomas has knowledge of other crimes but is refusing to divulge it. It says that Thomas met once with prosecutors and FBI agents in early September and had a discussion that "covered several areas of interest to the United States of which Mr. Thomas was believed to have knowledge."

Change of heart

A week later, Thomas and his attorney, Clarence Roby, met with authorities again, but this time "indicated he did not wish to be a 'rat' and that very close family members did not want him to be a 'rat' and therefore he would not relate any knowledge about other criminal activity to us."

Another document filed in the court record -- a letter from Letten to Roby -- uses the same language. It says that Thomas told authorities in that second meeting, described as a short one, that "his father and aunt did not wish him to be a 'rat.'¤"

Roby disputed the government's account, suggesting that Thomas hasn't said much because he has no information that is of interest to the authorities.

"I would disagree with the characterization in the motion," Roby said. "I don't think it accurately reflects his efforts to cooperate. Either you have information to give to the government or you don't. The government says, 'We think you know more.'

"That doesn't make it a fact; it's the government's opinion. Well, I disagree with the government's opinion. I don't know how else to put it."

Roby's protests aside, legal observers said the prosecution's memo is likely to carry some weight with the court and could spell bad news for Thomas.

Lecture from the bench

Vance, who holds Thomas' fate in her hands, already delivered one stern lecture to the councilman when he pleaded guilty in August, calling his actions "a body blow to a community that is already reeling under a wave of public corruption."

Now, she'll have to weigh Letten's assertion that Thomas is protecting others who have betrayed the public trust.

"Judge Vance didn't have a particularly positive reaction (toward Thomas) when he entered his plea, based upon her remarks at the time," said former U.S. Attorney Harry Rosenberg, now a defense lawyer. "If the government comes in with this type of motion, it certainly changes the dynamics. It's not what the defendants want to have on the day of sentencing."

Defense lawyer and former federal prosecutor Shaun Clarke said: "The court indicated at the time he pleaded guilty that she was aware of the impact this had on a very vulnerable city. I don't think it's a huge leap to think she's going to look unfavorably on his refusal to assist the prosecution in rooting out further corruption.

"He says he's sorry for what he's done. But here he is with an opportunity to root out corruption, and he's made a choice to put his personal loyalties above the needs of the community. I would expect the court will factor that in to the sentence."

Refusals rare

Dane Ciolino, a Loyola Law School professor and defense attorney, said a lack of cooperation by a defendant is not unusual. But it is rare, he said, for defendants who sign plea agreements to then refuse to help the government.

In such cases, he said, prosecutors have the option of asking the judge to set aside the defendant's earlier guilty plea and the agreement, which then can open the door to new charges. It may be that prosecutors don't feel they have the evidence to warrant such a step, Ciolino said.

Roby said Thomas "has lived up to the terms and conditions of his plea. I think he has attempted to comply as best he could."

'Disturbing language'

But in the new documents, prosecutors claim that Thomas let it be known he had evidence of other crimes.

"It became abundantly clear that Thomas had relevant information, was refusing to provide it, and understood this was in violation of his agreement to do so," the prosecution's memo says. "During that meeting, Thomas used some very disturbing language to express his steadfastness in not being truthful about criminal activity that he knew about."

The memo also claims that "on at least three occasions" after their last meeting with Thomas, prosecutors tried to set up additional interviews. "His attorney represented that Mr. Thomas does not wish to meet with authorities again," the memo says.

The government tried to set up a meeting with Thomas as late as last week, according to the letter from Letten to Roby that was introduced into the record.

Roby said he did not want to get into a "tit for tat" with Letten's office, but he disputed the assertion that Thomas has refused interviews.

Scheduling conflicts cited

"I would say he's had several occasions to be interviewed by the government," Roby said. "He has appeared on some occasions, and there have been times he's been asked to appear and either his schedule or mine wouldn't allow it. There were other occasions where he was medically prevented from going."

Thomas, who has kept a low profile since his guilty plea in August, appeared Tuesday on a local talk-radio program.

In the appearance, Thomas apologized repeatedly for what he called a "lapse in judgment," but said little about his dealings with the government. He spoke several times of his religious faith, and said he planned to tell Vance "something from my heart" before he is sentenced.

He said one of the lessons he has gleaned from his ordeal is that people must "speak out more pointedly about wrong, to make this a better place. What I'm getting out of all of this is that God doesn't make any mistakes. If you put your trust and faith in him, he'll lead you."

Motion unsealed

The prosecution's memo was filed last week with a request that it be sealed. It was introduced into the court record Tuesday morning after Vance denied the motion to seal it.

Ironically, Thomas' own crime came to the attention of authorities as a result of another convict's cooperation.

Restaurateur and political operative Stan "Pampy" Barre, who is awaiting sentencing for his role in skimming money from a City Hall energy contract, told authorities that Thomas had extorted roughly $15,000 in bribes from him in exchange for a pledge that he would help Barre retain a portion of a French Quarter parking contract.

Thomas also directed Barre to take on a partner, Joseph Jourdain, the brother of one of his aides.

Barre initially provided little useful information to prosecutors after he pleaded guilty to three felony charges in January. But that changed after one of his co-conspirators, former city Property Management Director Kerry DeCay, was sentenced to nine years in prison after pleading guilty to the same charges.

The harsh sentence -- which owed in part to DeCay's lack of cooperation -- seemed to serve as a wake-up call to Barre. Less than two months later, prosecutors had persuaded Thomas to plead guilty to bribery charges based on information provided by Barre.

While it's much more common for defendants to win shorter prison terms by cooperating with authorities before being sentenced, those who provide the government with evidence after they're incarcerated can still qualify for leniency.

If, within one year of sentencing, a convict provides "substantial assistance" in the prosecution of another case, the government may file a motion requesting a sentence reduction.

More Articles