Today marked the appearance of yet another admitted wealthy wiretapper testifying for the government under a grant of "use immunity." The wealthy wiretapper of the day was none other than former "B" movie of the week actor turned producer, Andrew Stevens. Similar to other wealthy wiretappers who've already testified for the government (like Suzan Hughes and yesterday's star witness, Adam Sender), Mr. Stevens testified today about listening to Anthony Pellicano play him alleged wiretaps. But unlike previous witnesses, Mr. Stevens didn't bother to cry like Ms. Hughes or offer a perfunctory admission of regret like Mr. Sender, rather Mr. Stevens told the jury that he wasn't even sure why he was testifying under a grant of use immunity. Mr. Sender insisted that it was his counsel who'd negotiated with the government and he'd have shown up to testify without a grant of immunity -- something that must have come as news to both his own attorney and the government. When pressed as to why, after Mr. Stevens learned that Mr. Pellicano had wiretapped privileged attorney-client communications between an entertainment attorney, John LaViolette and his clients from Intertainment, Mr. Stevens told the jury, "I wasn't sure what the laws were." So, apparently, he erred on the side of caution and kept Mr. Pellicano's wiretapping activities to himself.
When he actually learned about Mr. Pellicano's wiretapping, Mr. Stevens, like most of the government's admitted wiretapping witnesses, claimed to be shocked. "I was blown away," Mr. Stevens told the jury. "I asked him how he was able to do that. I assumed that he was recording from the Bloom offices which I thought was a very bold move."
Mr. Stevens, an independent producer, testified that he became involved with Mr. Pellicano in 2001 when he found himself involved in litigation between Franchise Pictures and a German company named Intertainment. He said, without any extensive explanation, that during the lawsuit he considered bringing a defamation lawsuit against Mr. LaViolette. At the time, Mr. LaViolette was providing legal counsel to both Intertainment executives Steven Brown and Barry Baeres, both of whom believed that Mr. Stevens had engaged in fraudulent activity. (Mr. Lally didn't bother to have Mr. Stevens testify about that small detail since it probably would have undermined Mr. Stevens' already fragile credibility.) "I retained Bert Fields at the firm of Greenberg Glusker in early March 2001," Mr. Stevens told the prosecutor, Kevin Lally. Mr. Stevens added that after hiring Mr. Fields, he paid a retainer to Greenberg Glusker in the amount of $100,000. (Mr. Stevens said that at that time Mr. Fields' billing rate was around $750.00 an hour.)
Mr. Stevens, speaking directly into the microphone and looking almost relaxed on the stand, then proceeded to be the second witness this week to link Mr. Fields directly to Anthony Pellicano. Mr. Steven explained that after his initial meeting with the prominent lawyer, Mr. Fields introduced him to Anthony Pellicano. "Did Mr. Fields explain why he wanted Mr. Pellicano?" Mr. Lally inquired. Mr. Stevens nodded. "Mr. Fields felt it was appropriate to take Mr. Pellicano off the market so the Bloom firm couldn't use him against me if a lawsuit occurred." (Mr. Fields' alleged advice was strategically sound since Mr. LaViolette was - -and still is -- a partner at the Bloom firm.)
Mr. Stevens first met Mr. Pellicano at Mr. Fields' offices around March 16, 2001. During the meeting, Mr. Pellicano requested his usual $25,000 retainer and it was subsequently paid to Mr. Pellicano by Greenberg Glusker and deducted from Mr. Stevens' $100,000 retainer. After the meeting, Mr. Stevens testified that he met with Mr. Pellicano on at least one occasion and spoke frequently to him over the phone. "It was my assumption that Mr. Pellicano was also associating with Mr. Fields," Mr. Stevens added.
AND THEN, it was time to go to the audiotape. After establishing for the jury that Mr. Stevens didn't know that Mr. Pellicano was recording -- like most of the folks who've admitted to wiretapping and ended up testifying -- Mr. Stevens told the jury that he became aware only after hearing a wiretapped conversation that Mr. Pellicano was wiretapping conversations. Mr. Stevens said that he went to the roof of his building to call Mr. Pellicano and listen to a wiretapped recording of Mr. LaViolette, Mr. Brown and Mr. Baeres. In the March 15, 2001 recording, Mr. Pellicano asks Mr. Stevens for all of Mr. LaViolette's phone numbers, including his home phone and home fax. Mr. Stevens is happy to comply, eagerly providing the information that he knows and promising to obtain the numbers that he doesn't know. Mr. Pellicano also specifically asks whether Mr. Brown works out of his house, noting that because Mr. Brown is based in Los Angeles and Intertainment is based in Germany, Mr. Brown is probably making calls from his home at all hours of the night. Finally, Mr. Pellicano asks Mr. Stevens to pull some strings and get him and some friends into a club. Sitting on the stand, Mr. Stevens tried unsuccessfully to suppress a smile as he listened to Mr. Pellicano ask him for help in gaining access to a club owned at the time by Mr. Stevens. It looked at that moment -- as well as a few others -- like if Mr. Stevens was actually enjoying listening to his own voice.
Mr. Stevens' managed to adopt a more serious countenance when the conversation turned to his veracity. "I'm from Memphis. I'm not from Los Angeles," Mr. Stevens told Mr. Pellicano, as if that fact would assure anyone of Mr. Stevens' truthfulness. And, in response, Mr. Pellicano reassured him that he didn't really care if Mr. Stevens was telling the truth. "I'm Sicilian," Mr. Pellicano pointed out. "If you're with me, you're with me." So, I guess that means that even if Mr. Stevens had been from Los Angeles, Mr. Pellicano still would have wiretapped for him. Good to know...
When Mr. Pellicano and Mr. Stevens finally stopped their mutual proclamations of trust, Mr. Pellicano made one final assurance to Mr. Stevens before hanging up. "These guys are fucking crazy if they think they can get away with this," Mr. Pelllicano said before ending the call.
BUT, THE RECORDING WASN'T OVER. MR. PELLICANO HAD ONE MORE CALL TO MAKE. After ending his conversation with Mr. Stevens, Mr. Pellicano immediately picked up the phone and called Mr. Fields' office. "Good afternoon, Mr. Fields' office," a receptionist answered. When Mr. Pellicano asked to be transferred to Mr. Fields' personal assistant, Roberta, the receptionist politely informed Mr. Pellicano that Roberta was not at her desk. "Please ask her to call me," Mr. Pellicano instructed before ending the call.
Mr. Stevens, like most of Mr. Pellicano's clients, was asked for additional compensation by the detective beyond an original payment of $25,000. "Mr. Pellicano asked for additional funds," Mr. Stevens noted. "I said that he should call Mr. Fields because he was retained by Mr. Fields and being paid by Mr. Fields -- uh Mr. Fields' firm, sorry." And when Mr. Stevens protested about having to pay more, Mr. Stevens said that Mr. Pellicano told him "Do you think what I do comes cheap?"
Today's witnesses also included yet another phone company employee who testified to providing confidential phone company information to former SBC employee and defendant in this trial, Ray Turner. The former employee, Michele Malkin, told the jury that she gave Mr. Turner the information because "I like Ray." She also took a moment to add that she always thought Mr. Turner resembled basketball star, Tony Parker. "Sorry to embarass you Ray, but he does."
Up next for the Government: Alec Gores, who undoubtedly will either express regret for wiretapping his ex-wife, or perhaps, do an Andrew Stevens and claim that he didn't know wiretapping was illegal.
Also expected to be called:
Wayne Reynolds (an ex-Pellicano employee)
George Kalta
Laura Morena (who was allegedly sexually harassed by Mr. Kalta) and some F.B.I. agents.
UPDATE: Chris Rock expected to testify on Friday.
Read all HuffPost's coverage from inside the Pellicano courtroom
Ignorance of the law never got anyone out of legal trouble.
Here is the law. This is California's wiretapping statute:
http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states/california.html
In California, without a warrant signed by a judge, it is crime to record a conversation without the consent of both parties, on a phone or in person, it’s the same crime.
Some will say it is okay if there is no expectation of privacy. This is false.
Some will say you can record, but you just can’t use the tapes in court. This is false. It is illegal without consent of both parties.