Live Blog: Kwame Kilpatrick Trial Day 47 - FOX 29 News Philadelphia | WTXF-TV

Live Blog: Kwame Kilpatrick Trial Day 47


And with that Judge Edmunds calls a halt for the week, reminds the jury not to read, watch, or otherwise talk about the trial and have a great weekend.  But you can read and watch all about it, especially the cash through airport security, tonight on Fox 2 News with M.L. Elrick and don't forget to read his unique takeaway on  Have a great weekend and I'll be writing more to you on Monday.


The sidebar is over and Chutkow now asking some clarifying questions.  Beeckman says the document came from Walbridge but he doesn't know who produced the document.  Beeckman says he got the unit prices wrong.   Judge Edmunds says that's what the defense was objecting to that this witness doesn't have personal knowledge about what the numbers at the bottom mean.

Beeckman now talking about a bid form that shows a 10 million dollar figure, says it's a line item in the contract, that DWSD was constructing an overflow, they needed land, and in conjunction with Pattern park,  it was a money swap for the land DWSD needed.  SAys it was a deal to get Patton Park construction going in trade for the land needed by DWSD.

Beeckman says the bid package was dated March 6th 2008.


Chutkow now showing a Feb 2003 memo from Dan Edwards of DWSD to other engineers talking about the bid protests.

Chutkow jumps to another text. date October 21.  The bid was let ten days after..

Bobby: "Walbridge is not playing ball black man, these white folks need to be made believers that they are not in control."

K: will call later

Chutkow now showing a list of companies that submitted sub contracting bids to Walbridge.  Ferguson is one of the companies.

At the bottom are numbers showing the companies bids and the rankings.  Number one is a company called WPM, Lonzo is second, John Carlo is third, Ferguson is 4th.

Beeckman explains the document is 3 pages, each showing bids for other types of work on the project.

The defense asks for a sidebar.

Its' been a long morning.  Kwame is stretching  in his seat.  Must have been pretty tense during the magnetometer testimony, he's really stretching out.  Bobby is looks like he's kidding with him.  they're both smiling now.


Chutkow is now trying to find a place to set up an easel so he can show the jury a time line.  He's asking the jury if they can see it.  One of the jurors is asking if AGent Beeckman can see. It.  Judge Edmunds laughs and says it's only agent Beeckman.  Beeckman smiles for the jury and they laugh.  It sounds like they like agent Beeckman.  He's not as young as Jensen but the ladies seem to be responding.

Beeckman now referring to the timeline, says this was for the Baby creek sewer contract.  Bid open was 12/2003, bid protest from Walsh,  a Chicago company, was next day, 3 days later Walbridge made agreement with FEI, Bobby's company.  And 3 days after that the City made it's decision on equalized credits, and the day after that WAlbridge was notified it was the low bidder.

3 more days and we get the Mercado memo and  the special administrator order to kwame.  Then we go from Feb to April when Kwame signed off on the project.


AGent Beeckman is back on the stand now and Mark Chutkow is doing the questioning.  SAys they'll be talking about Bernard Parker's testimony.  parker was the guy who worked for Bobby and in the City Human Rights department... we're back on sewer contracts.

We're seeing more texts.

Bobby you want to meet with john recolta Jr from Walbridge

K is that the main guy

Bobby yes he is Bernard Parker used to work for Walbridge... he can talk to them... we can use this to our advantage.

K cool set it up.  These are from Sept 11, 2002.  ABout 8 months into Kwame "Rein of Error" as my colleague M.L. Elrick called it.


Thomas is up now.  ASks how it was decided which denominations to use.  Jensen says he didn't hear Clift's testimony but he thought Clift said what he used.  Thomas says but Clift did not get specific, only talked about it being mostly hundreds.

Thomas who decided to put the money in the waistband.  Jensen says it was his.  Thomas says but you're not the special agent in charge.

Thomas says you know Clift was wearing gym shorts.  Thomas asks but you were wearing gym shorts why not put the money in the pockets.  Jensen says he didn't hear that Clift had the money in the shorts pockets only that he was wearing shorts.

Thomas says you're levis you were wearing over the shorts had pockets but you didn't put money in your pockets.  Yes.

Thomas says but nobody told you to put the money in your pockets.  Jensen says he was just told to conceal the money and nobody told him to put it in his pockets.

you may recall that Clift testified he was wearing gym shorts under his pants and had the money in the pockets of the gym shorts.  It seems like a silly argument that not having the money in the pockets of the shorts would make a difference other than just stuffing the cash in your pants.

Thomas says didn't you want the test to be accurate?  Jensen says the test was accurate. was it? it was.  Didn't you put the money in your pocket.  No the point was to see if money would send off the magnetometer.

Thomas, would you agree that different configurations of stack might set it off, didn't you consider that.  No.

You were aware of the facts we were challenging Clift credibility.  Why did you put your shirt over your waist, Clift didn't say he did that.  You didn't do that the way Clift did.  No.

You deny it would have been easier to see in Clift's legs than your jeans.  Yes.

And Jensen is done.  You can tell he's only been with the FBI 2 years.  He wasn't nearly as confident on the stand as the older agents but he sure gave Thomas a run for his money.

Jensen picks up the cash and Judge Edmunds asks "sure you don't want to leave it?" more laughs in the court room.  And young, buff agent Jensen departs to the sighs of the ladies in the gallery.


Boy, the prosecution asked about 2 minutes worth of questions and stuffed the whole cash thing right up Thomas' nose.

Agent Jensen is up now to talk about what it's like to have 90 grand stuffed in your pants.  He works in the FBI Detroit Division, says he used to work in organized crime division, and was once stationed in Iraq.  Thomas objects.  Judge sustains says move through that.

Jensen says he got permission to obtain $90,000 to do the test and brought the money with him to court.  Blackwell hands him a brick of cash about 6 I inches tall, says it's genuine US currency in hundreds and 50's.  85 hundreds and the rest 50's.

Jensen says some stacks are 50% hundreds and fifties.  Blackwell asks if one stack of hundred dollars bills is less than half an inch.  Thomas objects and asks for a ruler.  Judge over rules but sounds like she'd like to take a ruler to Thomas's knuckles. 

Blackwell asks if she can show the jury the money.  Judge Edmunds cracks that Blackwell might want to just show it to them and not hand it to them.  "not that I don't trust you."  gets some laughter in the room.


Thomas finishes without a flourish.  Mike Rataj is up now and asks if another test was done with the cash stuffed in the guys pockets.  Lorince says no.

Blackwell asks again if agents look for cash.  No

Thomas asks if looking at the bulge in the agents shirt can you tell if it's a bomb or cash unless you lift up the guys shirt.  No.

And he's done.  And the next guy up on the stand will be the cash in his pants agent who Vikki Thomas says is looking pretty buff.  So after the break us guys will have to sit through more boring testimony and the gals will get to view a little eye candy.


And the guy is still stuffing money down his pants.  Thomas makes another joke as the agent turns his back side to the camera, lifts his shirt, stuffs more cash down his pants and says sorry for this, it is what it is.  I don't know why Thomas thinks he's being funny,  The agent is young and buff and I know my wife would be going, "hubba hubba" right about now. 

Okay he's done stuffing money down his pants.  Thomas says look at the crease in the guys shirt, I'm asking you, if a screener saw a crease like that would you let the guy through.  Judge Edmunds at this point tells Thom's to stop testifying.

Tomas says can you tell me that you'd let this guy through.  Lorince says we see creases like  this all the time.  Thomas says and you're hear to protect our security.  Judge Edmunds jumps on him and angrily tells Thomas to move on.

Honestly,  The young buff agent now looks like a tubby waisted middle aged man with a roll over his belt.  If TSA agents stopped guys like that I'd never get through an airport.  Thomas just sounds vindictive.

Lorince says it happens every day, thousand of times, he wouldn't stop the guy.  Thomas says you would not.  It would not.  You would not sir.  No, I would not.


Thomas says but you're supposed to empty your pockets so how does the divestiture procedure help things.  Lorince says it speeds things up.  Thomas asks but you have to empty your pockets anyway.  didn't you tell me that people are required to empty your pockets.  Lorince says in 2008 yeah.

Thomas is asks if Lorince said it would be illegal to carry drug money.  Lorince says an x-ray machine might be able to see certain things.

Thomas is calling for the video now.  First clips shows the an empty metal detector and a security guy standing off to the right side with his back to the camera, only his  elbow showing.  Now the agent walks through and now lights or alarms go off.

Thomas asks if the closer to the sides of the device the more of a chance you'll get a reading.  Lorince says he can't discuss that. 

Now the security guy walks to the left side of the screen and leans over a counter.  Thomas asks if slouching over the counter is standard TSA procedure.  Lorince says the guy is working with a computer screen and this in not a casual conversation.  Thomas sounds catty.

Now the agent is stuffing the cash down his pants.  Thomas asks we can see he's not putting anything in his pockets.  Lorince says we'll see shortly.

Thomas make a crack about rubber gloves as the agent stuffs cash down the back side of his pants.  No one laughs.

It's taking ages for the agent to get all 90 grand in his jeans.  Thomas asks if he knows why the agent was wearing a T-shirt out side his pants.  Lorince I do not.  Thomas asks if the shirt doesn't convert his pants completely. Lorince say he doesn't know.


Lorince says they made sure the equipment was up to standards before the test.  Thomas asks if he knows  why they tested with the money around the agents waist an not in the  pockets.  Lorince says he doesn't have that information.

Denominations of the Bills.  Same answer.

Thomas says you agree with me that the machine has sensitivity settings. Lorince says yes.  ASks if settings can be changed.  Lorince says yes.

Thomas asks if the recorded levels  were well below detectable settings.   ASks if there are settings where metal would not set off the alarm. Lorince says the settings today are the same as back then.  Lorince says he doesn't know if there's a setting that wouldn't detect metal. Not his expertise.

Thomas asks if others saw recorded levels that others could have seen.  Lorince says that's not his area of expertise, he's not the science guy.



Thomas asks if they look for bulges in the pockets.  Lorince say they're always attentive to their surroundings. 

Thomas asks if he know what machine Clift went through.  Lorince says they only determined it was a CEIA device.  Lorince says there's only a 1 in 22 chance of going through a body scanner but everyone would go through a magnetometer.

Thomas asks if he went through an analysis of what kind of magnetometer Clift walked through.  Lorince says it's a 99 percent chance it was a CEIA.  Thomas says but that's not 100%.

Thomas says it's a possibility he only walked through a body scanner.  Lorince says going through the CEIA was 100% but there was a chance he  could also have additionally gone through the body scanner.

Thomas moves on to the maintenance of the devices.  Lorince says all the stuff is checked out before any customers come in.

Thomas says they have procedures to make sure envying works but you can't be 100% certain.  Lorince says he's notified immediately if a price of equipment is not responding.

Thomas says but there has been machine failure.  Lorince says yes.


Thomas asks if it's true that you can travel to another place and get an international flight.  True.

Thomas asks if security advisors look for cash on domestic flights.  Lorince says there are operations in certain cases.  Lorince says he hasn't seen it, but it could be, says they don't look for money, weapons are the priority.  Says they'd help other agencies but those are different investigations not what they'd be involved in.

Thomas asks if the screeners would be on alert and notify other agencies. Lorince says they do have protocols for that.

Thomas asks if he'd have had a choice to go through a body scanner.  Lorince says in 2008 the body scanner was being tested and not everyone went through it.

Thomas asks if there's an alert with a magnetometer would that person be sent to another place. Lorince says no, they'd let him or her empty pockets again.

Thomas asks if that doesn't work what happens.  Lorince says they'd do a pat down.

Thomas asks about hand wand scanners.  He knows all about hand wand scanners because we see them everyday when we come into the court house.

Thomas asks if money has any magnetic properties.  sCienticit studies, money in build amounts would set scanner off, or wands.  Lorince say I do not tall all these questions.


Lorince says the magnetometers don't detect paper currency and if they did they bring travel to a  halt.  Says they don't detect cash, it's not illegal to carry large amounts of cash, it only comes into play when you're traveling internationally.

Lorince says they did the test a hundred times without the cash, then put 90,000 in cash on his person and did that one hundred times.  Says the findings are that magnetometers don't detect the cash. 

And that's Blackwell last question.

Thomas is up, asks if Lorince works for TSA a division of HOmeland Security.  Asks if in 2008 the configurations were different.  Lorince says they have since added body scanners.

Thomas asks if the NOrth terminal had body scanners.  Lorince says after 2008.

Thomas makes it clear he's not going to go into security issues but asks if there's no way to get into the airport without going through a scanner.  Lorince says yes.

Thomas says in each place in the McNamara terminal there are several devices.  These were CEIA devices.  Lorince says yes.

Thomas asks if there's a body scanner in the terminal.  Yes.  Do you know how many. Yes.  Pregnant pause. then Thomas asks if I went there I could count them so you could tell me.  Yes.  How many.  15.

Lorince says they concentrated on the CEIA scanners and THomas says the devices would not have been used for people getting off the plane and that wouldn't be relevant for people unless they were leaving.  Right.

Thomas asks if Mahlon Clift had gone through a scanning device money would have been detected.  That's true.

Thomas asks about a much more intrusive device.  Lorince says much more thorough Device.  Thomas says I might call a machine that shows me in my underwear intrusive.  Lorince says it identifies the skeleton and not the body parts.  Thomas says that's refreshing to know.

Thomas asks if Clift had gone through any device other than a body scanner it would have been a CEIA.

Thomas asks a whole series of questions about checking out the scanner and if it was functioning before the test.  Lorince says he didn't have anything to do  with setting up the test.

Thomas asks for a general description,  I'll see TSA officials in blue shirts, and person checking identification, and another person who constantly repeats warnings to people, Lorince interjects and says they are divestiture advisors.  Thomas says the talk about taking everything out of your pockets.  Lorince says yes.

Lorince says there are a couple of reasons, to help passengers, to  make things quicker so that customers won't be detained an longer, and  make the whole process faster.


The court room is filling up and the attorneys are at the bench.  THey may be talking about the cash the FBI agent smuggled through airport Security.  This move was a response to Kwame's ATtorny Jim Thomas suggesting that a large amount of cash would set off the metal detectors.  Now, Thomas has been fighting to keep testimony about the FBI test out of the court room.  Funny, it seemed like a good idea at the time.  Kind of like Thomas's assertion that Kwame was meeting with that fictitious National Mayor's organization when he was taking trip to Colorado on the Kilpatrick Fund expense account.

And here we go.  First witness is Steve Lorince from HOmeland Security in charge of screening operations at Metro Airport.

Lorince says he checked the records and in 2008 when Kwame's friend Mahlon Clift claimed to have brought in lots of cash the airport was using CEIA Magnetometers.  Lorince is now running through what they do, how they are calibrated, and says they do daily calibrations.

Says the Mags detect metal, like knives and guns.

Blackwell asks if O'Hare and Midway airports in Chicago have the same standards.  Lorince says it's a national standard, yes.


Shea asks if the 2007 taxes were based on 2006 estimates.  Yes. 
 Asks if Schuck recalculated his income but not his expenses.  Schuck says he they based it on


Shea she recalculated the 2007 revenues based on what that year's revenues were and not the


Blackwell objects.  Shea pleads to the judge, "she's not answering My question.  Judge Edmunds

says agent shook answer his question yes or no.  Schuck says No.

No Bobby's attorney is asking if he can step out of the court room.  Judge Edmunds let's him go.

Shea continues.  Did you deduct meals, if he is generating more income you'd assume he's using

his phone more, there would be a change in expenses.  SChuck says he doesn't know.

Shea say but depending on what you wanted to hit him for  you based the expenses on 2006.

REmember, Bernard filed an estimated return but never filed an amended return.  If Shea is going

to go on and on about the 2007 expenses maybe he should put up a list of what those expenses

actually were,  Bernard sure didn't give the IRS any information.

Schuck now says she can't base her investigation on things she didn't receive.  Shea says that's

right, you don't know what the expenses were because they were never submitted.  Schuck says she

only knows that the IRS didn't receive the information.

Shea is done and Blackwell is up now. She's looking at line items for 2004 and the various

scenarios that Shea just asked about.  Shea interrupts and says he did not use that language at

all.  Judge Edmunds asks Blackwell to  rephrase.

Blackwell asks about cash, and Schuck  answers

TAx preparers could have been a ware of a profit sharing deposit in 2005. no.  Is it the

taxpayers responsibility to provide the information to the tax preparers.  Shea objects and says

Schuck doesn't know what Bernard's obligations were to his tax preparers.  Judge Edmunds over

rules.  SChukc says it's the taxpayers responsibility.

Blackwell asks about cash deposits.  Shea objects because she relying on Kado.  Judge overrules. 

SChuck says these figures are based on her investigation and show what he earned.

Shea not gets one more shot at her.  You don't know how much cash he had on hand in the previous

year.  Schuck says no. 

And she's excused.  We're taking a break for the jury.


Shea now asking about the 60,000 in cash he deposited in 2006,  says he's showing the same pattern but just not as much.  Schuck says correct.  Shea says he didn't over state his income in 2006, doesn't this illustrate the bank deposit method is  sometimes yields inconsistent results.

Schuck says but his record and the witnesses don't indicate that and she backed out all the cash he withdrew.

Shea says but now it looks like he over reported his income in 2006.  SChuck says she doesn't know with the money he withdrew so she gave him credit for it, even though it could have gone to  income.

Shea says but you know he gambles, and if he is depositing... uh uh, depending on the  source he's using to gamble the source could be non taxable cash.  Schuck says if he redeposit's money it's not counted but she didn't see any evidence that was going on.  she says he'd have to actually  have more cash thane he's accounted for to accommodate his  gambling activity.

Shea says if you lose money but have a little left over and redeposit that it's not taxable.  Schuck says right but she didn't see any evidence of that.

What I'd really like to see here is Shea put up a neat little  spread sheet showing the redeposit's.

Shea says but Bernard could have borrowed money to go to the casino  SChuck says right.  That wouldn't be taxable.  Right, but SChuck again says she saw no evidence of that.  So Mr. Shea, show us some evidence of that.


Shea asks so you assumed the leftover amount was income.  Yes. 

You didn't investigate whether this was non taxable money.  SChuck says she conducted a lot of interviews to determine his income.  Admits she didn't interview everyone who wrote him a check.

Shea says you know  123,000 in cash went into his personal accounts in 2004 but you don't know if a particular cash deposit was a repayment of a loan.  SChuck says but Emma Bell... Shea says that was a check I'm talking about cash.

Shea says if Bernard made a loan in 2003 and it was repaid in 2004 you wouldn't know.  Correct.

Asks if Bernard Borrowed money and then paid it back you wouldn't know.  SChuck says she knows how much cash he deposited in 2003.

You don't know how much cash he had in his wallet, in his safe,  You couldn't identify the non taxable items.  You do the best you can.  SChuck says there was know indication of a cash hoard, he filled out a questionnaire about his finances and didn't say anything about holding a lot of cash.

Judge Edmunds." Mr. Shea, Mr. Shea, let her answer the question."  Shea says I want her to answer my question.  "She's trying" and your 're stepping on her answers.

Shea says you know he dealt in cash, he was comfortable dealing in cash.  Schuck says she doesn't know  if he was comfortable.  Shea pounces and says but you don't know how much cash he had you only do the best you can.  You total deposits and are left with an unexplained balance and some of that may non taxable and you have not captured all tax items.  (I don't know why the defense isn't objecting right now.  Shea is testifying, he's delivering a monologue.)  If he loaned a cousin money and got paid back you wouldn't know the cash was a pay back and not deposited.

Shea finally gets her to says she can't identify every transaction.


Shea asks if she then has to look a the individual items to determine if they're income.  SChuck says yes.

He goes through the list and then asks if everything that's left over is assumed to  be income.  SChuck says she also conducted interviews with people to determine what might have been income.  SChuck says she was able to make identifications on some items, like the money Kado gave Bernard.

Shea says but Kado has been all over the map on what paid Bernard.  SChuck says Kado gave her a range.  Shea says but would  you agree his testimony was variable.  SChuck says she recalls there was a range and it was in excess of 200,000.

Shea says so you came to a conclusion on some deposits based on Kado's information and Kado's information  is  not reliable and impacts her conclusion.  SChuck asks him to repeat the question.  Schuck says Mr. Kilpatrick ...  Shea interrupts and says she's not answering the question, asks if she agrees that his info was unreliable.  Schuck agrees that Kado was unreliable but she says she conducted interviews with other people and most of that cash was backed out anyway.


Bernard's attorney John Shea is up now.  He's asking agent Schuck about the process she used to determine what was income.  He says what your 're not doing is identifying each income deposit item.  SChuck  says not specific.

Shea says your not identifying whether it's income, just the total.  SChuck says right.  He says you as  an investigator are making a determination on whether it's income or not.  This is the "Bank Deposit Method.

Shea says the only years you used the bank deposit method are 2004 and 2007.  SChuck says yes.

SChuck says Bernard had 5 personal accounts in 2004 along with 2 business accounts.

Shea says in 2004 the total is 882,074, and that reflects anything  that's a deposit.  SChuck says anything that's a credit to the account.

Shea asks transfers from another account.  Yes.

Shea says obviously with those transfers there are re-deposits, you backed out those, and others.  Schuck says yes.


Now SChuck is reading the warning on the signature page of the return saying the taxpayer can be prosecuted for perjury if they knowingly falsify the return.  This a direct refute of Bernard's lawyer's argument that his client didn't sign any documents talking about perjury.

Their looking at 2007 now when Bernard made more than $600,000 in cash deposits.  He reported only $70,000 in income.

Blackwell is now asking her about her estimates of Bernard's understatement of  income  SChuck says she subtracted the transfers from various accounts, 80,000.  Took  out currency withdrawals, Bank Fee refunds, refund of payments and other non income to get an adjusted gross income of 475,000.  Schuck explained yesterday that she was making a conservative estimate of Bernard's earnings and took out anything that looked like it might not be income, even if it could  have been income.  She says he still owes more that 100,000 for 2007.

for 2005,2005, and 2007 the total owed is 182,000.


Court is in session.  Looks like the defendants were allowed in the employee entrance this morning.  Judge Nancy Edmunds is on the bench.  She's asking if Jim Thomas if he got in all right this morning.  He says yes, it was wonderful on a cold day like this.  He's lucky, most of the members of the media just walked through he door in the last few minutes and are even now setting up their computers.

Agent Schuck is back on the stand.  She waved her government ID this morning and walked right past me in line.  She's testifying about Bernard Kilpatrick's tax returns.  Right now prosecutor Jennifer Blackwell is asking her about the tally sheet she made showing all Bernard's bank deposits.  According to her figures his corrected total income was more than $380,000.  She says he still owes $16,000 for 2004.


Good Morning from the Theodore J. Levin Federal Court House.  Look for a late start this morning, a hundred or more potential jurors are lined up outside the building, waiting to go through security.  That means the dependants and their attorneys may be delayed getting into the court house.  It took me more than half an hour to get in this morning... and it was cooooold.   Judge Edmunds talked about the delays in court yesterday.  She says she's lobbied for letting the defendants go through the employee entrance.  We'll see how far she got with that in a few minutes.

Ken Martinek is Senior Producer-Investigations for Fox 2 News.  You can contact him at

Powered by WorldNow

330 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106-2796

Phone: (215) 925-2929
Fax: (215) 982-5494

Didn't find what you were looking for?
All content © Copyright 2000 - 2014 Fox Television Stations, Inc. and Worldnow. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy | New Terms of Service What's new | Ad Choices