You Say Cooperation, I Say Obstruction Of Justice–Let’s Call The Whole Thing Off: Preliminary Reflections On The Laura Pendergest-Holt Criminal Complaint, Supporting Affidavit, and Arrest.

Here are the criminal complaint and supporting affidavit filed by the government in U.S. v. Pendergest-Holt, courtesy of the Houston Chronicle’s chron.com. And here is Monica Rhor and Devlin Barrett’s AP story, also on chron.com, detailing Pendergest-Holt’s release from jail (on a $300,000.00, 10% cash, bond), facilitated by a loan from Pendergest-Holt’s criminal defense attorney Dan Cogdell.

Certain things stand out right away. 

First, there was no good reason for the feds to arrrest and perp-walk Pendergest-Holt late on a Thursday, thereby forcing her to spend a night in jail, instead of allowing her to turn herself in for the arrest. It was chicken-shit. She is innocent until proven guilty. She hasn’t even been indicted by a grand jury. There was no way in hell that she was going to be detained, as evidenced by the Government’s failure to exercise its automatic right to a three-day continuance in order to prepare for a detention hearing. Yes, the prosecutors and FBI agents were within their rights in arresting and perp-walking Pendergest-Holt on Thursday afternoon. But it still stinks.

Second, FBI Special Agent Vanessa Walther’s affidavit is underwhelming. I would wait to see the complete transcript of Pendergest-Holt’s testimony before rushing to judgment. The government will have to prove that Pendergest-Holt intentionally gave false testimony. It is clear, even from the affidavit, that Pendergest-Holt gave at least some truthful, damaging testimony about R. Allen Stanford and James M. Davis. Moreover, Pendergest-Holt is accused, among other things, of failing to testify about all of the testimony preparation sessions she attended. But she was instructed by the SEC, in at least one instance, not to include, in her answer, testimony about any meetings with her attorney. SFG’s attorney, Attorney A, was present in several of these preparation sessions. If Pendergest-Holt did not think she had to mention all of the sessions, because Attorney A was present and representing her interests as well as SFG’s, she may have an excellent defense. So, let’s just wait and see. 

Third, Attorney A is in a heap of trouble. The feds allege that Pendergest-Holt lied under oath and obstructed justice. Attorney A sat through the entire deposition and attended virtually every prep session. Need I say more?

Fourth, at least one attorney-commentator has predicted with great certainty that Pendergest-Holt will cooperate against Stanford and Davis. But that will only happen if she pleads to a felony–and it isn’t at all clear that Pendergest-Holt is prepeared to do that. A close reading of the affidavit suggests that Pendergest-Holt may not have known about the alleged fraud until earlier this year. If that is correct, and if the entire case against her hinges on whether she obstructed jutice in Febraury 2009, Pendergest-Holt may well decide to fight.