Former Lynn Haven mayor asserts her innocence in motion to dismiss federal charges – The News Herald

LYNN HAVEN Attorneys for former Lynn Haven Mayor Margo Anderson have requested that charges against their client be dismissed with prejudice, claiming she was indicted "based on an inaccurate, deceptive and misleading narrative."

The motion, filed Monday, claimsAnderson has provided proof of her innocence of several of the charges filed against her.

It also asserts that she was the whistleblower who brought evidence to law enforcement of a scheme to defraud the city of millions in FEMA money, a "fact" the government has withheld.

Contentious counsel: Squabbling between attorneys in federal Lynn Haven corruption case hints at more fraud

Widespread scandal in Lynn Haven: Former Lynn Haven commissioner Antonius Barnes pleads guilty to federal corruption charges

The original indictment: Lynn Haven mayor and city attorney each charged with more than 60 federal crimes

The motion also alleges that the government withheld from her counsel evidence rebutting some or all of the charges Anderson facesby redacting it from discovery material turned over to her defense team.

"She lost her job, had to relocate to a new community and endured stress-related health conditions. Her name and reputation are ruined," the motion states. "Then she had to fight the government for almost a year to get information proving her innocence that should have been provided by the government without request as a matter of constitutional right."

Anderson was still serving as mayor when she was originally indicted Aug. 18, 2020, along with then City Attorney Adam Albritton,on more than 60 federal charges. Those includedconspiring to defraud, numerous counts of wire fraud and embezzlement of federal funds. She also faced counts of depriving the city of Lynn Haven and its residents of their right to honest servicesand lying to federal agents.

The Anderson and Albritton indictments came nine months after five others, including former Lynn Haven City Manager Michael White, had been charged with federal crimes. Those charges stemmed from a scheme in which two businesses worked with White to falsifyinvoices that allowed them to steal millions in FEMA debris removal funding assistancecoming to the city following Hurricane Michael in October of 2018.

The primary business involved in the scheme was Erosion Control Specialist, owned by David White, who is not related to Michael White.

The Anderson and Albritton indictmentallegedthat following Hurricane Michael, Albritton drafted and Anderson signed off on an agreement that extended the ECS debris removal deadline indefinitelyand that both requested and received work done at their homes by the company.

Later, James Finch, owner of Phoenix Construction, would also be indicted and Anderson was further charged with conspiring with Finch to steer construction projects to his company in exchange for gifts of travel andin one instance, a motor home. Some of the illegally procured projects indirectly involved Hurricane Michael debris removal and others, the original indictment said, occurred well before the storm.

While seven of the alleged co-conspirators have now pleaded guilty to the crimes filed against them and await sentencing, Anderson and Finch have vigorously fought the charges they face.

In her motion to dismiss, Anderson states she "was the whistleblower that brought the suspicious ECS payments to law enforcement."

Like Anderson, Finch has filed a motion to dismiss the charges he faces with prejudice, which would allow them to collect attorneys fees. Finch claims prosecutorial misconduct and violations of his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights.

The Fifth Amendment protects defendants from self-incrimination and prevents a person from being tried more than once for the same crime.The Sixth Amendment provides for a speedy trial before an impartial jury.

In August, District Court Judge Mark Walker sided with the attorneys for Finch and Anderson and tossed out a conspiracy charge the government had built its case around.

Hewrote in his ruling that while he saw clear intent to conspire in three of five "projects" he looked at to determine whether conspiracy allegations held up, in two others he did notand due to that he could find no alternative but to toss the entire charge.

In November, the government filed another indictment alleging conspiracy. This is the one Anderson and Finch are now contesting.

Anderson's motion to dismiss claims that her lawyers have provided documentation showing that "every contract executed by Anderson in favor of Phoenix Construction, every contract change order/addendum/task order executed by Anderson in favor of Phoenix Construction, every municipal bond executed by Anderson tofinance a Phoenix Construction projectand every promissory note executed by Anderson in favor of James Finch, were presented to the (Lynn Haven) City Commission, recommended by City staffand received unanimous approval by the City Commission."

It also states Anderson's defense team has provided a survey to prosecutors showing that hurricane clean up work the government claims Anderson had ECS do at her residenceand that of her mother and neighbor, was actually work done at a city easement property.

It likewise claims to have provided proof that allegations Anderson received insurance coverage at no charge are false.

The motion also questions the government's release of information gathered through testimony from those who have already pleaded guilty what is known as Brady or Giglio material. And it claims the grand jury that indicted Finch and Anderson in November was not given all the information it needed to objectively make its decision before decidingto indict.

"The Government has a track record of skewing innocent facts to imply nefarious conduct. It has demonstrated a propensity for presenting inaccurate facts to the grand jury, for isolating select facts in a manner that is deceptive and misleadingand for standing steadfast by a flawed narrative," the motion states.

Prosecutors have been given until Dec. 22 to respond to the Anderson and Finch motions to dismiss. Counsel for the two defendants will then have until Jan. 7 to reply.

A trial date in the case has tentatively been set for Feb. 28.

The rest is here:
Former Lynn Haven mayor asserts her innocence in motion to dismiss federal charges - The News Herald