This week, papers were filed with the Arizona Supreme Court alleging that Arizona’s Attorney General Mark Brnovich has tampered with evidence in criminal investigation of attorneys with the Snell and Wilmer law firm and victim businessman Will Graven.
According to the filing, “AG Brnovich, to insure that Pinal County would support his (Brnovich) claims that there was insufficient evidence to take the Snell & Wilmer Case to the State Grand Jury, has tampered with the materials/evidence that he transferred to Pinal County…in fact, he has not sent the “entire criminal file,” he has withheld key evidence.”
Sources have confirmed that the evidence does in fact exist.
According to Graven’s filing he is making the claim “because the Pinal County Prosecutor assigned to my “transferred” cases, Mr. William Wallace, just told me that there are none of the critically important and extensive materials I earlier (weeks earlier) told him he needed to locate in what AG Brnovich sent over to Pinal County related to the negotiations between the State and suspect Marc Stricker for his draft pre-indictment Plea Agreement and Factual Basis Addendum . (Stricker was my tenth former employee to be a suspect/defendant in a variety of crimes.)
The complex case involves Graven’s half a billion dollar construction company and the frauds perpetrated against him by his former employees. To date, the investigation, which began under Attorney General Tom Horne’s tenure, has already resulted in several indictments and guilty pleas. It stalled when Brnovich took office, and only after the ADI reported on the Attorney General’s decision to close the remaining cases, was it transferred to Pinal County Attorney Lando Voyles. It was widely believed that the case was transferred to Voyles in order to make it “go away.”
To that end, according to Graven, the Attorney General’s Office only forwarded evidence that would guarantee that the Pinal County Attorney, whose ethics have been in question on other matters, would make a finding that there was not enough evidence to proceed with the prosecution of two of Graven’s top employees and three Snell and Wilmer attorneys.
Graven’s latest filing reads in part:
· When I first told Pinal County Prosecutor Wallace of the suspect Stricker materials weeks earlier, I predicted these materials would be missing from what AG Brnovich had transferred/sent with my cases’ files.
· And I told Prosecutor Wallace that without these Stricker materials, he could not make a complete and fair determination of the merits of the Snell & Wilmer Case, or even effectively prosecute the pending prosecution cases, nor make a complete and fair determination of either the Victorville Case or the Emery Rubble Case.
· Stepping back for a moment (to before I asked Wallace if he had found the suspect Stricker materials I had earlier told him he would need), Pinal County Prosecutor Wallace called to say as there was nothing of note in the suspect Stricker materials he had, such as the audio recording of Stricker’s interview at the Attorney General’s Office, he (Wallace) would likely not pursue Stricker as a witness or suspect.
· The effect of the missing Stricker materials could also be heard when Prosecutor Wallace told me that there was nothing in the audio recording of suspect Stricker’s interview at the Attorney General’s Office that would support my having earlier told Prosecutor Wallace that suspect Stricker was ready to complete a Plea Agreement and be a witness for the State. It should be noted, suspect Stricker’s interview was on September 18, 2014, long before Scott Hesse’s Plea Agreement (my ninth former employee implicated in the matters at hand) on December 18, 2015 (which put tremendous pressure on Stricker to roll-over), and long before Stricker’s offer to then roll -over when he heard of the anticipated contents of Hesse’s Plea Agreement, and that it was close to being signed.
· Stricker was told if he did not come in then, the least he would later get-by with would be two designated felonies.
· I then asked about the suspect Stricker materials I had weeks earlier told him he needed to locate, which is when he informed there were no such materials in what AG Brnovich had sent over. Missing, was/is:
· Emails between Assistant Chief of Special Investigations and Special Agent Dan Woods and suspect Marc Stricker’s criminal defense attorney, Timothy Eckstein;
· Emails between Prosecutor Joe Waters and Marc Stricker’s criminal defense attorney, Timothy Eckstein;
· Copies of internal communications between Assist. Chief Woods and Prosecutor Waters regarding suspect Stricker;
· Copies of Assist. Chief Woods’ Master Report with Stricker’s handwritten notes on such copies; and
· Copies of draft Plea Agreements between the State and suspect Marc Stricker; and particularly critical, are copies of the draft Factual Basis Addendum that was to be attached to Stricker’s Plea Agreement.
· Stricker’s draft Factual Basis Addendum was 15 pages long, and contained dozens of admissions, some of which would have further supported charging Snell & Wilmer, and some of which would have supported charging the Victorville suspects (Victorville is the other large case, and the second of my three cases AG Brnovich closed).
· But, perhaps most importantly, is that the admissions in Stricker’s draft Factual Basis Addendum would have made convicting Defendant Daniel Esposito, a forgone conclusion.
· Which is why Defendant Esposito, upon hearing portions of what Stricker’s draft contained, had offered to come in and roll-over to be a witness for the State.
· Defendant Esposito’s rolling-over would have made convicting Snell & Wilmer a forgone conclusion (as it would have for the Victorville Case, the Emery Rubble Case, and pending prosecutorial cases) (ESPOSITO HAS ALREADY BEEN INDICTED IN THE SNELL & WILMER CASE…AND DEFENDANT DEBORAH DUBREE HAS CONFESSED TO THE SNELL & WILMER CASE CRIMES).
In early April, Graven filed a Peremptory Writ of Mandamus with the Arizona Supreme Court asking that the Arizona Attorney General’s Office present the results of investigations into the actions of attorneys with the Snell and Wilmer law firm as well as several officials from the City of Victorville, California to a State Grand Jury.
The Snell and Wilmer law firm, which represents both the Arizona Governor’s Office as well as the Arizona Attorney General’s Office in the unpopular lawsuit against the Tohono O’odham Nation, has many former employees in the highest levels of government including Ducey administration and the Secretary of State’s office.
Graven alleges in his latest filing that AG Mark Brnovich has withheld the suspect Stricker materials:
1.) To hide the admissions in Stricker’s Factual Basis Addendum; and
2.) Thereby stop the prosecutorial dominos that Assist. Chief Woods and others had long been setting, and causing to fall-over one after the next. As the next domino after the Stricker domino was Defendant Esposito, AG Brnovich had to act. ..as the Esposito domino would have knocked-over the Snell & Wilmer domino. So, AG Brnovich fired Assist. Chief Woods eliminated the Stricker domino, and other acts as reviewed below.”
“As will be seen below, AG Brnovich fired Assist. Chief Woods just after the Hesse Plea Agreement/domino was signed/knocked-over (2 days after). The Hesse domino was to then knock-over the Stricker domino, in the form of Stricker’s Plea Agreement, which was to be signed within days of Hesse’s Plea Agreement being signed,” Graven alleges.
The filing then reads in part:
· On Monday December 14, 2015, I met with Assistant Attorney General Michael Bailey and the Chief of the Criminal Division Don Conrad to demand an explanation as to why they would not proceed with taking the Snell & Wilmer Case to the Grand Jury (and the Victorville Case and the Emery Rubble Case). One of my questions to them was how they could be denying prosecution when the Hesse Plea Agreement was to be filed with the Court on the Friday, which the knowledge of had caused the next suspect, Marc Stricker, to roll-over (including he was completing a killer Factual Basis Addendum), which had caused Esposito to schedule his coming in to roll-over.
· On that following Friday December 18, Assist. Chief Woods and Prosecutor Joe Waters had their ninth suspect, Defendant Scott Hesse, agree in Court, to a pre-indictment Plea Agreement (which had the Factual Basis Addendum with admissions that were extremely important to other cases and defendants)
· That Friday night December 18, Assist. Chief Woods was called at home by Division Chief Conrad, at which time Conrad put Woods on Administrative Leave
· The following Tuesday December 22 (3 days before Christmas), Assist. Chief Woods was fired (he had been approved for a raise just days before my visit on Monday December 14)
· AG Brnovich began refusing all Public Records Requests.
· Just after the Winter Holidays, on January 8, 2016, AG Brnovich then closed my last three cases (the three cases I am seeking a Writ of Mandamus for, one of which is the Snell & Wilmer Case [my two largest cases, Snell & Wilmer, and Victorville, anticipated to be tough defendants, had been held back from the Grand Jury until as many cooperating defendants and as much evidence as possible could be gathered])
· On January 15, 2016, AG Brnovich sought to remove me as the victim of my many cases, and name one of my 40 companies as the victim, making my receiving restitution far more complicated, if not unlikely
· AG Brnovich then removed my longtime Prosecutor from my cases
· AG Brnovich then suspended pre-indictment Plea Agreement negotiations with the tenth former employee, suspect Marc Stricker
· Following suspect Stricker’s pre-indictment Plea Agreement negotiations being suspended, Defendant Esposito’s coming in to roll-over was lost in the shuffle
· The other/second Assistant Chief of Special Investigations, Dr. Charles Loftus, was demoted, which, as a senior professional, caused him to resign
· My lead agent in the third case that was closed, Investigation Case No.: P-21013-1134, known as the Emery Rubble Case, S.A. Lauren Buhrow, was fired
· Another Special Agent that was particularly seasoned and respected as an investigator, and contributed to Woods’ efforts, S.A. Mike Edwards, was demoted and transferred out of Special Investigations
· AG Brnovich, without even telling the Chief of Financial Remedies, released all liens on all remaining assets of all criminal defendants in all of my cases
· AG Brnovich then told me there were no more assets to realize any additional restitution from and that what I have received thus far, is it. However I know, as does former Assist. Chief Woods, and others, AG Brnovich had assets in his possession that were yet being liquidated for my benefit (in his Response, AG Brnovich repeatedly attempts to demonstrate his successes in pursuing these matters by stating that he has collected $500,000 in restitution for me, and I appreciate that, but I did loose over $600,000,000 (yes, over six hundred million dollars), so less one-tenth of one percent has been collected
· AG Brnovich then reopened my three closed cases (as a result of the press, and others, investigating)
· AG Brnovich then sent my three closed cases to Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery (rather than hire a Special Prosecutor), who refused them saying his was not the right agency to investigate these cases and then threw these hot potatoes right back to AG Brnovich
· AG Brnovich then transferred (rather than hire a Special Prosecutor) all of my pending prosecutorial cases, and three reopened investigations, to the Pinal County Attorney’s Office
· AG Brnovich then committed Fraud on this Supreme Court by defending himself in his Response to my Petition by stating that I am asking this Supreme Court to issue an Order to force him to prosecute civil claims against three Snell & Wilmer attorneys from a civil complaint that I had filed years earlier (it is the Snell & Wilmer Criminal Case that I and others want AG Brnovich to prosecute, not my unrelated civil case…this is well documented in two different Snell & Wilmer Criminal Reports)
· And now, we have AG Mark Brnovich tampering with evidence.
· I expressed my concern for where AG Mark Brnovich was going, and how far he would go with his efforts to protect Snell and Wilmer in my Reply to his Response, on page 11, in the first full paragraph:
· The above behavior and acts clearly demonstrate that AG Brnovich, in destroying the Snell & Wilmer Case at the Attorney General’s Office, has made it obvious that: he is seeking to protect Snell & Wilmer, in part, by eliminating investigators, plea agreements, evidence, and cases, and by these efforts, eliminate any possibility of Snell & Wilmer being further investigated and indicted, by anyone, including Pinal County.
A video of the AG’s case outlines what investigators and attorneys in the AG’s office believed was enough to proceed with indictments. Since that public information was made public, current Attorney General Office employees have taken steps to smear former Assistant Chief of Special Investigations and Special Agent Dan Woods and his team at the Arizona Attorney General’s Office.