How to Indict a Ham Sandwich

Solomon Wachtler, the former Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals, once quipped that special prosecutors of grand juries have so much power over grand jurors that they could coax grand jurors into indicting a ham sandwich, and the Washington, DC grand jury that indicted me was a ham and swiss on rye.

A grand jury makes the initial decision to indict (formally accuse) a criminal defendant to stand trial, and the phrase “grand jury” has authoritative connotations—like the gods on Mount Olympus have sent down a decree. But grand juries are notoriously susceptible to manipulation. Unlike a standard trial, a grand jury proceeding is cloaked in secrecy: Grand juries aren’t open to the public, and the identity of the witnesses who testify and the content of their testimony are never disclosed. Moreover, there is no cross-examination or presentation of the defense’s case.

The special prosecutor of a grand jury calls the witnesses, questions the witnesses, and selects the evidence that is shown to the grand jurors, and grand jurors are normal, everyday citizens who have shown up for jury duty and have been funneled to a grand jury. Generally, only witnesses and evidence deemed relevant by special prosecutors are presented, and special prosecutors are in a unique position to influence grand jurors’ judgments in a particular direction.

Jay Stephens, the U.S. Attorney for D.C., appointed Alan Strasser, the Assistant U.S. Attorney for D.C. and chief of the felony trial division, to be the special prosecutor of the grand jury investigating me. Strasser received his bachelor’s degree in economics from Yale University in 1974, and he was a 1977 graduate of Harvard Law School. He joined the office of U.S. Attorney for D.C. in 1980.

Despite Strasser’s lofty academic credentials, the grand jury he directed to investigate me served a ham sandwich to the public, and it was a cover up of epic proportions. He never called the three people who helped me run my escort service or me to testify before the grand jury that was ostensibly investigating our operation of an escort service. I’m also not aware of Strasser calling the escorts I employed to testify. Unfortunately, my mother was subpoenaed to testify before the grand jury.

A Washington Times article, commenting on the grand jury investigating me, confirmed my lingering suspicion that it was extremely corrupt. The article revealed that the newspaper’s reporters had contacted “a number of principal witnesses and active participants in the case” and “discovered that few of them had been interviewed, and only a handful had been asked to testify before the grand jury.”

Washington Times reporters interviewed “a longtime acquaintance” of Craig Spence, the CIA asset who used my escorts to blackmail the rich and powerful, who had been called before the grand jury. The Washington Times reported that the “witness was not asked any questions about credit cards, Mr. Spence’s alleged involvement with the homosexual call-boy ring or about the ring itself.” The witness told the reporters that one of the grand jury’s primary concerns was establishing if Spence had been in the possession of purloined White House china that dated back to the Truman administration.

Spence was involved in pandering children, pandering adults, blackmailing powerbrokers, procuring illicit drugs, etc., so I find it mindboggling that one of the grand jury’s primary concerns was whether or not he had absconded with some of the White House’s Truman china.

Instead of indicting Spence, the grand jury overseen by Strasser indicted me on 43 RICO counts that had the potential to imprison me for 295 years! As I look back on that grand jury in retrospect not only was it designed to have me take the fall for all of Spence’s illicit activities, but it’s 43-count RICO indictment with the potential for 295 years was designed to leverage my silence, because I had witnessed activities that would’ve jeopardized the Bush administration and subsequent Bush dynasty.