The Defense Attacks

He was to have been the Government's star witness, the person characterized by the prosecutors as "more or less the middleman in this whole affair."

He had in fact been indicted with the others, but the Government wanted his help so badly that it had granted him immunity in exchange for his cooperation.

But the more Harry Sears testified last week in a crowded Manhattan courtroom, the more he sounded like a witness for--instead of against--former U.S. Attorney General John Mitchell and former Secretary of Commerce Maurice Stans.

Sears in his previous testimony had spun a strong web of circumstantial evidence to support the Government's charge that Mitchell and Stans illegally tried to ease the tangled problems of Financier Robert Vesco with the Securities and Exchange Commission. As his part of the deal, claimed the prosecutors, Vesco made a secret contribution of $200,000 to President Nixon's campaign in 1972. But then Sears, 54, lawyer, former G.O.P. leader in the New Jersey senate and political handyman for Vesco, turned to Play-Doh in the skillful hands of Peter E. Fleming Jr., Mitchell's top defense attorney.

Front Row Seat. Sears made the whole Vesco affair sound like the everyday fraternizing of friends in high places rather than a plot to trade political influence for a campaign contribution. When Sears said he had introduced Vesco to his friend Mitchell on March 12, 1971, the defense pointed out that the date was 13 months before the financier made his gift and six days before the SEC even began looking into Vesco's mutual-fund operations overseas.

A main point in the Government's case against Mitchell is the claim that on the very day--April 10, 1972--that Vesco made his contribution, doors that had been closed to the financier began opening. But Sears admitted that Mitchell had been trying for a month before the donation to get a date for Sears with SEC Chairman William J. Casey. Sears further contended that when he did meet with Casey he simply requested that Vesco be allowed to tell his side of the story. Asked Fleming: "Did you ever ask Mr. Mitchell to fix the Vesco case?"

Sears: "Never." Sears later added: "I know of absolutely no attempts that were ever made to 'fix' the SEC matter."

The Government then produced Laurence B. Richardson Jr., former president of Vesco's International Controls Corp., the company that ran the suspect mutual-fund operations. Richardson, 52, broke with Vesco in 1973 over company policies and went to the Government with the story of his former boss's contribution to the Nixon campaign. He testified about attending a meeting with Vesco on March 8, 1972, in Stans' Washington office. According to Richardson, Vesco told Stans that he wanted to make a donation to the Nixon campaign but that he had a problem --the SEC investigation. Vesco claimed that the probe was really an SEC vendetta against him and his company.

Testified Richardson: "Mr. Stans said, well, how much you got in mind to give? And Vesco said, well, he wanted to be in the front row. And Mr. Stans then said, well, we expect X number of people to give a million dollars, and he gave another number that might give a half million or more. Then Mr. Vesco said, I think I would like to give a half-million." (He was to give $50,000 publicly plus the secret $200,000.) During the meeting, said Richardson, Stans declared that he could not help Vesco with the SEC problem, but added: "Let's see if we can get you an appointment with Mr. Mitchell while you're here." But Richardson could not say if Vesco did meet with Mitchell. And Fleming scored by asking Richardson:

"When you went with Robert Vesco on March 8th to Maurice Stans, had you and Robert Vesco agreed to fix ICC's case with the SEC?" Richardson: "No."

In fact, testified Richardson, "I said to Vesco that I was astonished when I heard him say he wanted to give a half-million dollars. And he said, well, it is a lot cheaper than legal fees. And I said, well, if you think those guys are going to do anything for you because you paid that contribution, why, forget it."

Old School Tie. That admission was yet another bonus for the defense --and a clear indication of the general strategy that Mitchell and Stans would use against the Government's charges of conspiracy and obstructing justice. It was becoming obvious that the former Cabinet officers would employ a variation of the old-school-tie defense: they had merely tried to see that friendly Harry Sears and his generous client Vesco got a fair shake from the SEC. They can also point out that if there had been a plot to help Vesco, it had been singularly unsuccessful. Shortly after Nixon's victory in 1972, the SEC accused Vesco and his associates of perpetrating a $224 million stock fraud.

But while the Government prosecutors seemed to be losing some ground on the conspiracy and obstructing justice charges, they were quietly building a case for their third set of counts--that Mitchell and Stans had each committed perjury six times before the grand jury investigating the whole affair.

Sears contradicted Mitchell's testimony that he had never received any written material from Sears about Vesco. In fact, Sears said that on May 18, 1971, he had sent a letter concerning Vesco to Mitchell. Mitchell also told the grand jury that he had never been asked by Sears to get the SEC to withdraw a subpoena against Vesco; Sears insisted that he had made such a request to Mitchell. In addition, Mitchell seemed to be hurt by the testimony of Daniel W. Hofgren, a G.O.P. fund-raiser who had helped put Vesco in touch with Stans. Hofgren said, contrary to Mitchell's claim, that he had indeed spoken to the former Attorney General about Vesco.

As for the perjury charges against Stans, Richardson testified in support of the Government's claim that Stans had lied in saying that he had not asked for the $200,000 in cash from Vesco. In addition, both Richardson and Sears contradicted Stans' testimony that he had not suggested payment before April 7, 1972 (the cutoff date for secret contributions of $100 or more). Hofgren and Richardson also repudiated Stans' assertion that he had not referred Vesco to Mitchell for help on the SEC problems.

If proved, each count of perjury against John Mitchell and Maurice Stans could bring a fine of as much as $5,000 and a sentence as long as five years.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.