McCaskill Pre-Shepard Personal and Finance Section

Document Sample
McCaskill Pre-Shepard Personal and Finance Section Powered By Docstoc
					                  Claire’s Pre-Shepard Personal & Financial Issues
David Exposito: Beyond The Pot Charge:
                                           McCaskill/Exposito Timeline
                               Year                             Event
                                 1984    Marriage begins
                                 1989    Exposito/McCaskill lien/debt to GMAC
                                 1990    Exposito tax lien to Union Bank
                                 1992    Exposito property used as drug haven exposed
                                Jul-94   Exposito arrested for marijuana possession
                               Aug-94    Exposito/McCaskill condo auctioned due to taxes
                               Oct-95    Judge finds for GMAC in debt case
                               Nov-95    Exposito/McCaskill divorce
                                            SOURCES: Multiple press and court accounts

                                                 Drug House Property
In March 1992, It Was Revealed That Property Owned By Exposito Was Being Used For
The Sale Of Crack Cocaine. “On Jan. 15, a police informant probably didn‟t notice the
remnants of an old Claire McCaskill campaign poster when he knocked on the door at 3723
Main St. He entered the rundown house, according to court records, and paid $20 in marked
money. The dealer reached under a couch cushion and delivered a rock of crack cocaine. Normal
enough, except the house is owned by David Exposito.” (Lambe, “Drugs Sold From House,” KC Star, March 31,
1992)

McCaskill Defended Herself And Her Husband By Asserting That The Dealers Broke Into
The Property Unbeknownst To Them, But A Political Rival Attacked Her. “„Those people
(selling drugs) were squatters who kept clipping the padlock off the door,‟ McCaskill said. . . . „I
don‟t think there is anything we could have done to prevent this. It just shows how pervasive the
problem is.‟ Michael Shaffer, a lawyer who is running against McCaskill for prosecutor, blasted
her Monday, saying she should have disclosed the trouble with the house.” (Lambe, “Drugs Sold From
House,” KC Star, March 31, 1992)

Records Indicated That McCaskill Promptly Responded To A Prosecutor’s Letter
Regarding The Drug Problems At The Property And Encouraged Them To Stop The
Activity. “Confidential letters obtained by a reporter from a prosecutor‟s files show that David
Fry, Jackson County‟s chief drug prosecutor, first sent Exposito a warning letter on Nov. 13. Fry
wrote that there was reason to believe the property was used for the sale or use of drugs. He
asked Exposito to take immediate action to stop it and warned that the house could be taken by
the state. Fry‟s letter followed an Oct. 28 anonymous complaint he received from „a concerned
owner and businessman of the area.‟ That letter alleged that from four to 12 persons were using
the unrented house for drug sales and prostitution. McCaskill mailed a letter to Fry on Nov. 19.
The investment property owned by her husband and his brother, John Exposito, has long been
vacant and anyone in it should be arrested for trespassing, she said. „We urge law enforcement
authorities to take whatever action is necessary to stop illegal drug activity in this house,‟
McCaskill wrote.” (Lambe, “Drugs Sold From House,” KC Star, March 31, 1992)
McCaskill Padlocked The Doors, But When That Did Not Prevent A Drug Buy They
Boarded Up The Property. “She and her husband also then padlocked the doors. Next,
McCaskill said, Fry sent a letter March 2 telling of the Jan. 15 drug buy. He again warned of the
possibility of forfeiture. McCaskill and her husband paid about $200 to have the house boarded
up in March, and the boards appeared intact last week.” (Lambe, “Drugs Sold From House,” KC Star, March 31,
1992)

In July 1992, McCaskill’s Primary Opponent Attacked Her For Not Tearing Down The
Property Sooner. “A dilapidated house at 3723 Main St. fell to the wrecking ball a week ago,
but it started a political hurricane Thursday. The house once owned by Claire McCaskill‟s
husband became the center of character attacks in the Jackson County prosecutor‟s race. . . .
Shaffer started Thursday by attacking opponent Claire McCaskill for not demolishing the house
last fall, when county prosecutors first told her drugs were being sold there. Police bought crack
cocaine at the house in January from someone who McCaskill said had broken into the house.
„The reason this drug house is down now is because of Mike Shaffer,‟ Shaffer said. . . . „Claire
McCaskill is an absentee landlord who did nothing but put a padlock on the door. I call into
question her integrity.‟” (Lambe, “House Is Gone,” KC Star, July 3, 1992)
A Lawyer For GMAC, Which Held The Lien On The Property, Supported McCaskill’s
Version Of The Events That Led To The Home’s Demolition. “McCaskill said she could not
tear down the house earlier because General Motors Acceptance Corp. held a lien against it. A
lawyer for General Motors Acceptance Corp. on Friday supported her version of events. Shaffer
produced a demolition contract signed by McCaskill, which he said shows she had control of the
house all along. Her check paid for the demolition, Shaffer contended. McCaskill said of Shaffer:
„This is a politician who is twisting the facts to try to make the innocent look guilty. Those
qualities would be very scary in a prosecutor.‟ Employees of W&L Excavating, which
demolished the house, also attacked Shaffer in Friday interviews. They said Shaffer and assistant
Mike Fletcher had first threatened them with legal action and then tried a bribe in an attempt to
get a copy of the demolition contract.” (Lambe, “House Is Gone,” KC Star, July 3, 1992)
NOTE: During the meth scourge of the mid-1990‟s in which KC dubiously became the “Meth
Capital of the World”, McCaskill began a practice of slapping restraining orders on drug
properties. Does that mean McCaskill would have done the same to her property with Exposito
that almost took them a year to demolish?
                                      Osage Beach Condo Auction
In August 1994, McCaskill Learned That Her Osage Beach Condo Would Be Auctioned
Off Due To Her And Her Husband’s Failure To Pay Taxes. “No other way to put it - Jackson
County Prosecutor Claire McCaskill is having family troubles. Within weeks of her husband‟s
arrest for marijuana possession, she learned from a reporter Thursday that her Osage Beach
condominium was to be sold for back taxes. „My brother paid those,‟ McCaskill said. Then why
did Camden County publish a notice that it will auction off the condo Aug. 22 because Claire
McCaskill and David Exposito, her husband, owe $2,337 in taxes.” (Lambe, “McCaskill Gets Tax-Bill
Surprise,” KC Star, August 5, 1994)

                                        $1 Million GMAC Debt
In April 1993, McCaskill Expressed Surprise That Her Husband’s Car Dealership Was
Sued For Over $1 Million Owed To GMAC, And She Said Her Role Was To Be A
Supportive Spouse. “McCaskill and her husband, the former owner of a car dealership, have
been sued in federal court over a $1 million debt to General Motors Acceptance Corp. The
lawsuit arises from a $2 million promissory note that GMAC issued in February 1988 to New
Plaza Pontiac Co., a now-defunct dealership at 4200 Main St. . . . Exposito, who is McCaskill‟s
husband, and Christopher P. Exposito, his brother, were president and vice president,
respectively, of New Plaza. The lawsuit alleges that New Plaza made only 10 payments on the
loan before going out of business in December 1989. GMAC has since foreclosed on the New
Plaza property. David Exposito has liquidated some personal assets, but GMAC contends that it
still is owed $1,087,077.68. McCaskill said it was standard business practice in Missouri for
spouses to sign loan guarantees. So she and Christopher Exposito‟s wife, Billie K. Exposito, are
named in the lawsuit as well. „This is legal maneuvering over a business failure,‟ McCaskill said.
„This lawsuit has absolutely nothing to do with our personal finances, my former law practice or
my status as an elected official, and has everything to do with being a supportive spouse.‟
McCaskill was surprised the lawsuit was filed, in part because GMAC still is being paid from
proceeds of the sale of the dealership and other property, and because negotiations had been held
over resolving the debt. I think it‟s unfair to my family,‟ McCaskill said, „that their business life
becomes fair game because of what I‟ve chosen to do for a living.‟ The $2 million loan mainly
paid for the property on Main Street.” (Jackman, “McCaskill Named In Lawsuit,” KC Star, April 16, 1993)
Secretary Of State Documents Tell A Different Story That Shows Claire As The Registered
Agent Of Her Husband’s Business That Made Multiple Errors And Failed To Pay Taxes:
                                 MISSOURI SECRETARY OF STATE

Company Name: NEW PLAZA PONTIAC CO.
Type: DOMESTIC BUSINESS CORPORATION
Status: FORFEITED
Status Comment:
 FAILURE TO FILE AN ANNUAL REPORT
 FAILURE TO PAY FRANCHISE TAX
Status Date: 12/18/1989
Filing Date: 3/27/1979
Duration: PERPETUAL
Date of Incorporation/Qualification: 3/27/1979
State or Country of Incorporation: MISSOURI
Registered Agent:
 CLAIRE MCCASKILL
 Agent Appointed: 6/26/1989
Registered Office:
 3407 WEST COLEMAN ROAD
  KANSAS CITY, MO 64111
Fiscal Year Begin Date: 6/1
Fiscal Year End Date: 5/31
Corporation Number: 00209049
Franchise Taxes: YES
Annual Report:
  Date Filed: 12/15/1988
History:
 Type: ACTIVE
IN GOOD STANDING; ALL REQUIRED REPORTS FILED
Effective Date: 12/15/1988
Comments: FRANCHISE TAXES ARE APPLICABLE



Type: ACTIVE
ARTICLES OF RESCISSION FILED TO RESCIND A PREVIOUS FORFEITURE OR
ADMINISTRATIVE DISSOLUTION
Effective Date: 1/21/1988



Type: FORFEITED
FAILURE TO FILE AN ANNUAL REPORT
Effective Date: 1/1/1988



Type: ACTIVE
ARTICLES OF RESCISSION FILED TO RESCIND A PREVIOUS FORFEITURE OR
ADMINISTRATIVE DISSOLUTION
Effective Date: 4/8/1986



Type: FORFEITED
FAILURE TO PAY FRANCHISE TAX
Effective Date: 8/9/1985



Type: ACTIVE
IN GOOD STANDING; ALL REQUIRED REPORTS FILED
Effective Date: 6/11/1985



Type: ACTIVE
IN GOOD STANDING; ALL REQUIRED REPORTS FILED
Effective Date: 6/4/1984



Type: ACTIVE
IN GOOD STANDING; ALL REQUIRED REPORTS FILED
Effective Date: 5/26/1983



Type: ACTIVE
IN GOOD STANDING; ALL REQUIRED REPORTS FILED
Effective Date: 5/21/1982



Type: ACTIVE
IN GOOD STANDING; ALL REQUIRED REPORTS FILED
Effective Date: 7/17/1981



Type: ACTIVE
IN GOOD STANDING; ALL REQUIRED REPORTS FILED
Effective Date: 7/16/1980



Type: ACTIVE
NEW CORPORATION INCORPORATED WITHIN LAST 7 1/2 MONTHS IN GOOD STANDING
Effective Date: 3/27/1979
SOURCE: Missouri Secretary of State records, Accessed July 23, 2004

To See The Docket For The GMAC Case, Please See Attached Documentation.
NOTE: After The 1998 Primary, Berger Mentioned A Exposito/McCaskill Lien That
McCaskill Deemed Minor. “McCaskill . . . defeated . . . Conway in the August Demo primary,
airing television ads accusing Conway of shirking liability of taxes owed to the federal
government. But some of Conway‟s local allies note that McCaskill has never mentioned an IRS
lien filed against her and her ex-husband. Of the IRS lien, McCaskill said, „It (a lien) may have
been (filed) one year for a small amount. A lien was filed against my ex-husband 10 years ago
due to an error, but that was cleared up.‟” (Berger, “Police Department Wants,” STL P-D, August 30, 1998)
McCaskill & Other Drug-Related Matters:
                                              1992 County Prosecutor Race
In July 1992, McCaskill Admitted To Smoking Marijuana When She Was “Young And
Dumb”, But She Said It Shouldn’t Be A Campaign Issue. “McCaskill and Mike Shaffer said
in interviews this week that they smoked marijuana many years ago. . . . [McCaskill] said only
that she tried marijuana „many years ago, when I was young and dumb. Indiscretions of youth
should not be an issue in any election, nor should they be a distraction from any of the issues in
this campaign,‟ she said.” (Lambe, “Smoke Marijuana?” KC Star, July 22, 1992)
McCaskill Would Not Say If She Had Tried Other Drugs Besides Marijuana, And She Said
She Would Take A Drug Test To Prove She Was Not On Drugs. Shaffer and Peters said
marijuana was the only drug they experimented with. McCaskill did not say whether she had
tried any drug besides marijuana. . . . The other three Jackson County prosecutor candidates said
polygraph tests are not reliable and are never accepted in court as evidence. McCaskill said she
supports drug testing for prosecutors and is willing to take a drug test at any time.” (Lambe, “Smoke
Marijuana?” KC Star, July 22, 1992)
Only Days After Appearing Unclear On Drug Use Aside From Marijuana, McCaskill
Asserted That She Had NEVER Used “Cocaine Or Other Drugs.” “McCaskill also clarified
earlier comments on past drug use. She had said that she had used marijuana, but was unclear
about possible use of cocaine or other drugs. She said she has never used cocaine or other
drugs.” (Lambe, “Prosecutor Candidates Vow To Wage Clean Race,” KC Star, July 24, 1992)
                                               From 2004 KCTV Interview
Q: Have you ever used illegal drugs? McCaskill: “Back in the 70‟s I did some stupid things,
along with most people of my generation, but certainly that was the extent of it.”
Q: When did you stop using drugs? A: “In the 70‟s when I was very young I did some very
stupid things.” ALSO: 4 year investigation into drug use: Detective asked for FBI help on
McCaskill in 1995. (KCTV, Accessed July 3, 2004)
                      1997-1998 County Prosecutor’s Office Employee Crackdown
McCaskill Questioned The Statute Of Limitations Regarding A 1994 Case Against Former
Employee Ruth Carter’s Role In The Manufacturing Of Meth. “A Jackson County judge on
Wednesday named a special prosecutor to investigate drug allegations against . . . McCaskill‟s
office manager and a former prosecutor‟s office employee. The former employee, Ruth Carter,
made and sold methamphetamine, according to police reports related to a 1994 raid of Carter‟s
house. She was never charged, and McCaskill says the statute of limitations may have expired.”
(Lambe, “Special Prosecutor Chosen In Drug Case,” KC Star, October 2, 1997)

Police Reports Indicated That McCaskill’s Office Manager Supplied Carter With
Confidential Law Enforcement Information And Received Meth From Carter. “Office
manager Anna Wiggins supplied Carter with information from law enforcement computers and
used meth that Carter gave her, police reports said. This week, Wiggins said she used meth only
twice and provided confidential police information to Carter once.” (Lambe, “Special Prosecutor Chosen In
Drug Case,” KC Star, October 2, 1997)

McCaskill Requested A Special Prosecutor Investigation After Learning That The KC Star
Had Acquired Information About The Investigations. “McCaskill requested the special
prosecutor‟s investigation after she learned The Kansas City Star had obtained police reports
about the investigations of Carter and Wiggins. McCaskill said she had not seen the reports
before Friday. „I have complete confidence in the integrity of this office, but it is public
confidence that is important,‟ McCaskill said. „That‟s why I‟ve asked for an aggressive
investigation.‟” (Lambe, “Special Prosecutor Chosen In Drug Case,” KC Star, October 2, 1997)
McCaskill Fired Carter After The 1994 Incident And She Suspended Wiggins Without Pay
Upon Learning Of The New Reports. “McCaskill fired Carter in 1994 after learning about the
raid on Carter‟s home. But later that year, Carter went to work for the county assessor. She left
that job last year. On Friday, McCaskill suspended Wiggins without pay, pending the outcome of
the investigation.” (Lambe, “Special Prosecutor Chosen In Drug Case,” KC Star, October 2, 1997)
Police Reports Stated That Carter Asked Wiggins To Check The County Records For
Information On Confidential Informants, Which Wiggins Denied. “Carter repeatedly told
associates she could identify informant because her friend „Anna‟ checked arrest warrants in the
police computer, reports said. Wiggins said she asked an investigator to check one name in the
computer, at Carter‟s request. But Wiggins said it was for a child-support warrant, which is
confidential information. A police check of the computer system showed no attempts by
Wiggins to learn the names of confidential informants.” (Lambe, “Special Prosecutor Chosen In Drug Case,” KC
Star, October 2, 1997)

Later In October, McCaskill Accepted Wiggins’ Resignation And Crane’s Investigation
Began. “Crane on Thursday began investigating drug allegations against Jackson County
Prosecutor Claire McCaskill‟s now former office manager and another former employee. On
Thursday, McCaskill accepted office manager Anna Wiggins‟ resignation, after Wiggins
requested she do so.” (Lambe, “County Drug Inquiry Begins,” KC Star, October 3, 1997)
In January 1998, The Special Prosecutor Questioned McCaskill’s Judgment In Handling
The Carter/Wiggins Case But Found No Wrongdoing On Her Part. “A special prosecutor
who investigated drug allegations in . . . McCaskill‟s office found no wrongdoing on
McCaskill‟s part but questioned her judgment in the matter. . . . Crane concluded that
McCaskill did not impede cases against either Carter or Wiggins, but he criticized her for not
firing Wiggins in 1995. „The mistake McCaskill made was to trust Wiggins,‟ Crane said, but she
did not have grounds for charges against Wiggins.” (Lambe, “McCaskill Cleared In Drug Case,” KC Star, January 22,
1998)

McCaskill Asserted That Wiggins Had Been Her Friend, But She Said She In No Way
Interfered With The Carter Investigation. “Wiggins was a friend and valued employee,
McCaskill said Wednesday, adding, „I believed in Anna Wiggins and probably erred by giving
her the benefit of the doubt.‟ McCaskill said she was pleased that Crane had found that she
wanted Carter prosecuted and correctly passed that case to special prosecutors. „I would not
interfere in an investigation for my own mother,‟ McCaskill said.” (Lambe, “McCaskill Cleared In Drug Case,”
KC Star, January 22, 1998)

                                                       2004 Revelations
A 33-Page Special Prosecutor’s Report Included Allegations By A Drug Task Force
Commander That McCaskill Requested That Wiggins Not Be Arrested. “The 33-page
report by a special prosecutor contains unresolved allegations by a drug task force commander
that McCaskill told police not to arrest Anna Wiggins. Wiggins was connected to Ruth Carter, a
methamphetamine dealer employed in the prosecutor‟s Independence office. . . . Wiggins, who
later admitted to using drugs with Carter and supplying her with information from the law
enforcement computer, was not prosecuted. She eventually received a five-day job suspension,
but continued working for McCaskill until 1997 when the investigation became public.” (McGraw,
“Report On McCaskill Leaves Questions,” KC Star, June 29, 2004)

The Report Shows Possible Contradictions In McCaskill’s Statements To Investigators, In
Addition To Alleging She May Have Compromised The Investigation By Discussing It
With Wiggins. “McCaskill told Crane that she was unaware of the task force‟s early interest in
Wiggins, despite several instances in March 1994 when Jensen and other law enforcement
officers said McCaskill was kept informed of developments in the investigation of her
employees. Jensen said he phoned McCaskill at home to tell her police were planning to arrest
Wiggins on the same day they raided Carter‟s home, but she told him not to do it. McCaskill says
she was in Las Vegas -- with Wiggins -- when she first heard about the raid and Carter‟s arrest.
McCaskill told Crane repeatedly that she was unaware that even Carter was a subject of the
investigation until the raid on March 25. But at least two senior members of her staff said they
were aware that Carter was under police investigation before then. The report also notes that
McCaskill talked to Wiggins about her involvement with Carter on at least three occasions in
1995. McCaskill acknowledged the discussions, but said the conversations could not have
jeopardized the investigation.” (McGraw, “Report On McCaskill Leaves Questions,” KC Star, June 29, 2004)
A Drug Task Commander Reported That McCaskill Personally Told Him Not To Arrest
Wiggins, Despite The Case That Was Being Built Against Her In Relation To Carter.
“Jensen said he called McCaskill the next day to tell her a judge approved a search warrant for
Carter‟s home. And he contacted her again to obtain her home phone, pager and cell numbers, he
said. It was on March 25, sitting outside Carter‟s home in his patrol car, when Jensen said he
called McCaskill once more, to inform her that the raid was complete and that Wiggins was
about to be arrested, too. Jensen now says he had intended to put Carter and Wiggins in separate
interview rooms and use their statements against each other to build a case. „McCaskill told me
that it would not be necessary to pick up Wiggins because she did not have any knowledge of
Carter‟s involvement with drugs,‟ Jensen stated in the Crane report. Jensen said he asked
McCaskill how she knew this. She allegedly replied that „she ran into Wiggins one day in the
break room while at work and she had a discussion with Wiggins about Carter and she told
Wiggins that Carter may not be the person she thought she was and she might want to stay clear
of her.‟ Wiggins told The Star that McCaskill never told her to stay clear of Carter. After the call
to McCaskill, Jensen used his radio to call off the patrol car going to Wiggins‟ house, he told The
Star. After that, Jensen said, he called Anderson to tell him: „I just notified Claire and she said
not to pick up Anna.‟” (McGraw, “Report On McCaskill Leaves Questions,” KC Star, June 29, 2004)
McCaskill Denied Jensen’s Tale Of Events, And She Said That Certain Figures Disliked
Her As Prosecutor Due To Her Gender. “McCaskill calls Jensen‟s allegation „absolutely not
true.‟ Asked why the police version of events differed so significantly from her own, McCaskill
told The Star she got along with most police officers, but „there are some cowboys, and there
were some people that resented the fact that I was the woman in charge and that I had the kind of
power I had.‟” (McGraw, “Report On McCaskill Leaves Questions,” KC Star, June 29, 2004)
Despite Other Investigators Corroborating Jensen’s Account, McCaskill Denied Any
Allegations That She Compromised The Investigation Into Wiggins. “Varner, who worked
for Jensen on the task force, confirmed to The Star that Jensen told him to drop the Wiggins
matter because of McCaskill. Varner said he then told Independence patrolman Mike Cano, who
was working the Carter case for the task force at the time, that there would be no further
investigations of other employees in McCaskill‟s office at that time. Cano, too, remembers the
investigation being called off. „I feel there is a cover-up on this whole deal,‟ he said. „After I got
my case on Ruth Carter, I was going to start on Anna. I felt like I was left high and dry.‟ Jensen
said he later told McCaskill, „I don‟t know if it was illegal, but I sure thought it was unethical for
you to have a conversation with Anna during an investigation.‟ McCaskill said that didn‟t
happen, either. She said that she‟d clearly remember if a police officer called her unethical. She
said she was not aware of allegations against Wiggins until 1995, more than a year after Jensen
said he told her. Crane noted in his report, „Assuming the Wiggins problem did come to her
attention in 1994, the Prosecutor did fail to respond to this information in the same way she did
to the information on Ruth Carter....‟” (McGraw, “Report On McCaskill Leaves Questions,” KC Star, June 29, 2004)
McCaskill Possibly Told Two Different Versions Of Her Awareness Of The Carter
Investigation. “McCaskill told Crane at first that she didn‟t know about Carter until the raid on
March 25, when she said she was in Las Vegas. She said she did not file a motion for a special
prosecutor until March 28. The March 17 authorization of the search warrant for Carter,
however, shows a special prosecutor already was assigned to handle the case. Crane found no
records about the special prosecutor‟s appointment. Some members of McCaskill‟s staff, such as
Willis Toney, then chief of the office drug division, knew of police interest in Carter before the
raid, Crane found. Jackson County Assistant Prosecutor David Fry also said the investigation
„was internally discussed with McCaskill prior to the filing of the motion for a special prosecutor
and prior to the issuance of the search warrant.‟ When Crane questioned McCaskill, she
conceded that she may have known about Carter before the execution of the warrant, but
repeated she knew nothing about Wiggins until 1995.” (McGraw, “Report On McCaskill Leaves Questions,” KC
Star, June 29, 2004)

Other Drug-Related Staffing Issues:

In November 1994 It Was Discovered That McCaskill’s Top Appointed Drug Prosecutor
Was Handling Criminal Defense Cases For Drug Defendants While Serving The County.
“Jackson County‟s top drug prosecutor has continued to represent drug-related defendants in
federal court since being hired in 1993, an arrangement that may pose a conflict of interest.
Willis L. Toney was a private defense lawyer when County Prosecutor Claire McCaskill
appointed him to head the county‟s drug unit on Feb. 15, 1993. His clients included criminal
defendants and people whose money or property had been seized under the suspicion that it was
drug-related. But even after joining the prosecutor‟s office, court records show, Toney
represented three persons who had large amounts of cash seized by the federal government. Two
of the forfeiture cases were resolved this summer, and the third is pending. Toney also continued
to serve as the attorney for a man charged in a major federal cocaine case. In an interview this
week, Toney acknowledged that he should have dropped the cases earlier than he did. . . .
Missouri law prohibits prosecutors from defending clients in criminal cases, although they can
legally handle civil cases, such as federal drug forfeiture cases. . . . McCaskill said: „There were
two mistakes made by Willis, and I don‟t mean to minimize them.‟ She said that Toney should
not have continued to handle the forfeiture cases even if it was technically legal and that he
should have filed the proper paperwork to withdraw from the cases. „Any indication he is
anything less than dedicated is unfair,‟ McCaskill said. „I think he has accepted (that) he has
made a mistake and is taking blame, and I think that is important also.‟” (Jackman, “Prosecutor Also
Defended In Drug Cases,” KC Star, November 30, 1994)

      NOTE: Toney has contributed $990 to McCaskill’s campaign committee since April
       2001.

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:107413
posted:3/22/2011
language:English
pages:9