Tucker Contends There Are Gaps in FBI’s Tapes : Courts: Congressman accused of extortion says secret recordings of his dealings with undercover informant while mayor of Compton are incomplete. Prosecutors deny the claim.

With trial testimony drawing to a close, the prosecution and defense battled Wednesday over whether gaps exist in secretly recorded FBI tapes incriminating Rep. Walter R. Tucker III in an extortion scheme.

Testifying in his own defense, Tucker contended that the FBI audiotapes and videotapes documenting his dealings with an undercover informant are incomplete.

The 38-year-old Democrat is charged with extorting $30,000 and soliciting an additional $250,000 in bribes from businessman/informant John Macardican while serving as Compton’s mayor in 1991 and 1992.

All of the payments were recorded on nearly 30 hours of tapes, which constitute the core of the government’s case.

But Tucker testified Wednesday that several meetings he had with Macardican either were not recorded or were recorded and not turned over to the defense, a claim prosecutors denied.

At one alleged meeting in June, 1991, Tucker said, he “clarified” his relationship with Macardican, making it clear that he would accept the businessman’s cash payments but saying “I’m going to earn it” as a consultant.

Macardican was seeking local government approval of a proposed $250-million waste-to-energy conversion plant. Tucker said that in return for a fee, he agreed to advise Macardican on lobbying the Compton school district to sell some land Macardican wanted for the project.

On the witness stand Wednesday, Tucker said his arrangement with Macardican was reached during an impromptu meeting lasting 30 to 45 seconds in the parking lot outside Macardican’s Compton office. There were no witnesses, he said.

To rebut Tucker’s account, Assistant U.S. Atty. Steven G. Madison brought Macardican back to testify that the parking lot meeting never occurred.

Macardican said that he wore a concealed recorder or transmitter during every meeting with Tucker, that he was always accompanied by an FBI agent when he went to Compton and that only the FBI had the keys to his office.

Under terms of a contract he signed with the FBI, Macardican said: “I was prohibited from talking to [anyone involved in the case] or going to Compton without their approval.”

Macardican also denied that he had ever agreed to hire Tucker, an attorney and minister, to work as a consultant for his project.

Among the other encounters that were not recorded, Tucker said, was one in which he sought a $10,000 interest-free loan from Macardican in 1992. The government says that payment was extorted in return for Tucker’s tie-breaking vote giving Macardican exclusive negotiating rights with the city.

In his testimony, Macardican denied loaning any money to Tucker and declared that he paid him the $10,000 for his vote. He said he would have required Tucker to sign a promissory note if he had made a loan to him.

Both sides also locked horns over the existence of telephone message slips that Tucker contends will show calls to him from an undercover FBI agent who was posing as Macardican’s financier. The government says the calls were never made.

Under questioning by defense attorney Robert Ramsey Jr., Tucker said the message slips were among boxes of materials subpoenaed by the U.S. attorney’s office last year. He said he spotted one of the slips in a box that was to be turned over to the government.

But when questioned by Madison, Tucker acknowledged that the defense made copies of all materials surrendered to the U.S. attorney’s office. Asked if he had found the missing message slip, Tucker said: “No. I’m still looking, but I know I saw it.”

Tucker has testified that he became “uncomfortable” when FBI agent Robert Kilbane, posing as Robert Kelly, Macardican’s financier, talked about having bought his vote in return for a promised $250,000.

The two-term congressman said he believed the money was to be payment for his lobbying of the Compton school board.

As he has done throughout his cross-examination, the prosecutor on Wednesday pressed Tucker to explain why he did not object or contact the police when Kilbane spoke of paying money for his votes.

Tucker said he saw no need to do that.

In response to previous questions about money for votes, Tucker has explained that he was simply “trying to humor [Macardican]” by appearing to agree. In another case, he said he did not know what Macardican was talking about, and in yet another, he testified that confronting people is “not my personality. It’s not my way of doing things.”

Madison accused Tucker on Wednesday of eagerly pursuing his relationship with Kilbane despite his stated reservations.

Quoting from the transcript of a Nov. 22, 1991, telephone conversation between Tucker and Kilbane, the prosecutor observed that Tucker talked in code, using “paperwork” to mean money, and that he asked for delivery of the “paperwork” through a designated intermediary.

In response, Tucker insisted that this was not a reference to money, but to background information about the waste conversion project that he needed to begin his lobbying of school board members.

After testimony from a few more rebuttal witnesses, both sides are scheduled to deliver closing arguments today to the U.S. District Court jury hearing the case.