Tucker Defense Attacks FBI’s Role in Compton

The star witness in the extortion trial of U.S. Rep. Walter R. Tucker III was accused by the defense Friday of using the FBI to extort money from Compton city officials.

John Macardican, a businessman turned informant, was the central figure in a three-year political corruption investigation that led to the indictments of Tucker and former Compton City Councilwoman Patricia Moore.

Tucker, 38, is accused of extorting $30,000 and soliciting an additional $250,000 in bribes from Macardican’s Compton Energy Systems, which proposed building a $250-million waste conversion plant in the city.

Tucker was Compton’s mayor in 1991-92 when the bribes were allegedly sought.

The attack on Macardican came as defense attorney Robert Ramsey Jr. closely questioned FBI Agent Michael Swinhoe, Macardican’s contact with the bureau since 1984.

It was in that year that Macardican first went to the FBI with allegations that his project had been blocked because he would not pay a bribe to then-U.S. Rep. Mervyn M. Dymally (D-Compton). Dymally has called Macardican a liar.

Although the FBI did not initiate an investigation at the time, it maintained periodic contacts with him as a “cooperating witness.”

After one telephone conversation with Macardican on Nov. 24, 1987, Swinhoe wrote a memorandum that said in part: “If Compton officials at any time learned he was cooperating with the FBI, [Macardican] feels that fear of his association would prevent them from interfering with the legitimate development” of his waste-conversion project.

Focusing on the agent’s account, Ramsey suggested that Macardican was trying to use the FBI “to extort Compton officials to approve his project.”

He also contended that Macardican was hoping an FBI investigation would help him in efforts to settle a lawsuit he had filed against the city of Compton, a charge that Swinhoe denied.

No evidence was offered Friday that Macardican told officials of his ties to the FBI.

Macardican’s proposal was dormant in Compton at the time. It was not revived until 1989 when Compton authorities sought out Macardican and asked him to resubmit the proposal.

The defense also took aim Friday at the FBI’s justification for targeting Tucker after his election as mayor in April, 1991.

FBI Agent Kevin Adley, who ran the investigation, said he “administratively” opened a corruption probe in July, 1990, before Tucker held elective office. It was one of five initiated by the FBI in Compton since 1987, he revealed.

He testified that in 1991 he requested approval from FBI headquarters to investigate Tucker.

He based his request, he said, in large measure on statements made by retired Compton Planning Director Robert Gavin.

Gavin, working as a consultant to Macardican, had met with Tucker to discuss the project and reported back that the mayor was “a sleaze” who would probably want money for his support, according to Adley.

He said similar statements about Tucker were made by Moore, who is awaiting trial; by Joseph Spraggins, a contractor who later pleaded guilty to conspiring with Tucker, and by the late Wes Sanders, a onetime city official who managed Tucker’s mayoral campaign.

Outside the presence of the jury, Ramsey told the court the defense would show that Gavin never made those remarks.

After getting approval from Washington, agents in the FBI’s public corruption unit arranged for Macardican to wear a hidden recorder and installed video devices in three offices where Tucker was observed soliciting and accepting payments from Macardican and an undercover FBI agent.

In a related development, Moore filed a motion in federal court Friday claiming she was singled out for prosecution because she is black and seeking dismissal of her indictment on 23 extortion and tax evasion counts.

“Apparently, because of the United States’ governmental concern that blacks are incapable of governing, it was of paramount concern that the government try to destroy the credibility and, more importantly, the influence of Compton’s progressive black elected leadership,” her motion states.

Assistant U.S. Atty. John Potter, who is prosecuting the case, said there “is no truth in her allegations.”

A Nov. 13 hearing on her motion is set before U.S. District Judge Consuelo Marshall, who is presiding in Tucker’s trial.