E-mail battle to doom Pa. case?

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Prosecutors warned in a court motion obtained by The Associated Press that the corruption case against a former state lawmaker and Democratic legislative aides may hinge on how a judge rules in a battle over e-mail evidence.

Chief Deputy Attorney General Frank Fina said in papers filed in Dauphin County court Tuesday that defense attorneys do not have a legal basis to support their demands about proving e-mails are valid and viewed in the proper context.

He said the dispute, which has previously been waged behind closed doors, needs to be resolved prior to trial of former state Rep. Mike Veon and as many as four others next month.

The defendants, accused of diverting state workers and resources for campaigns or other purposes, were among the first 12 to be charged in the three-year probe that has resulted in 25 arrests and one acquittal.

“It has been lingering undecided for over six months, and continues to resurface with a vengeance in almost every proceeding,” Fina wrote. “Exclusion of the commonwealth’s e-mail evidence on the grounds offered by the defense would ’terminate or substantially handicap the prosecution.”’

Dan Raynak, a lawyer for former Rep. Mike Veon, said Wednesday that prosecutors have provided e-mails without also giving defendants access to hard drives and other elements that can establish their authenticity.

The dispute includes e-mails that were turned over to prosecutors by former Majority Leader Bill DeWeese and House Democratic lawyers as part of their effort to cooperate with the investigation.

“Instead of doing a search warrant, they did a subpoena. They relied on Bill DeWeese and his staff of attorneys to decide what should be turned over, and we have a problem with that,” Raynak said. “We want the full story, not just the portion of the story that Mr. DeWeese wanted the prosecution to see.”

DeWeese was charged Dec. 15 as part of the same investigation but is not among those scheduled for trial with Veon next month.

Raynak said he would soon ask the presiding judge to delay the trial’s start, scheduled for Jan. 19, because a large volume of evidence was recently handed over by prosecutors.

Phone messages seeking comment from the attorney general’s office were not returned Wednesday.