ST. LOUIS – A prosecutor’s agreement to dismiss a felony charge against Missouri’s governor came after a promise to resign. It has many people asking whether this case was all about politics.
Two lines in the Stipulation for Dismissal appear to stand out.
Line 5 states, “The Circuit Attorney hereby dismisses the (computer tampering case). …The Circuit Attorney further stipulates that, upon receipt of the defendant’s resignation from office by the Secretary of State of Missouri, the Court may dismiss (the computer tampering case) ...”
Defense attorney Jim Martin said this about whether that means this was political.
“We’ve been pretty clear of our viewpoints of every aspect of this case and our opinions haven’t changed,” he said.
St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner took the offense during her news conference.
“The consequences Mr. Greitens suffered he brought upon himself by his actions, his decisions, his ambition and his pursuit for power,” she said. “There was no coordinated effort by anyone to target him based on his politics.”
Defense counselor Martin confirmed the defense approached prosecutors about the deal but denied the computer tampering case was the driving force in the governor’s resignation.
“Once the (resignation) decision was made, we made every effort we could to clean up every aspect of the matters that were involved in the governor,” Martin said.
It’s also important to note line 6 in the agreement. It says, in part, “Defendant, after advice of counsel and in consideration of the stipulations herein, releases the Circuit Attorney of the City of St. Louis and all members of her office and consultants of her office from any civil liability (in both cases).”
This could refer to perjury allegations aimed at a private investigator hired by prosecutors, as well as allegations the circuit attorney sat silently during the lies.
The deal to release all civil liability will not impact the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department’s criminal perjury investigation.
Also, Wednesday’s dismissal has no impact on the felony privacy invasion investigation now in the hands of a special prosecutor. We’ll know soon what happens with that case because the statute of limitations expires June 11.