Va. bankers scored a rare victory against federal prosecutors - USATODAY.
com
Cars Auto Financing Event Tickets Jobs Real Estate Online Degrees Business Opportunities Shopping
Search
Home News
News » Washington Politics
A USA TODAY investigation:
Misconduct at the Justice Department
Va. bankers scored a rare victory against
federal prosecutors
Updated 9/28/2010 1:36 PM | Comments 19 | Recommend
Enlarge By Garrett Hubbard, USA TODAY
Richard Holland Jr., President of Farmers Bank, sits
in his Windsor, Va., office. Compensation didn't make
up for the way the case darkened his life and his
parents' last days.
OTHER DEFENDANTS WHO WON
CLAIMS AGAINST GOVERNMENT
Under a 1997 law, courts can order the Justice
Department to repay winning defendants' legal
fees if the defendants show the prosecution
was unwarranted. USA TODAY found only 13
cases in which such defendants have won
compensation. Among them:
$1.5 million was paid in 2004 to a
Florida couple, Marlene and Steven Aisenberg,
accused of deceiving state and federal
authorities about the disappearance of their 5-
month-old daughter from her crib. She was
never found, alive or dead. The case turned on
electronic bugging of their house that,
prosecutors said, detected incriminating
statements in which the mother blamed the
father for the child's death. When U.S. District
Court Judge Steven Merryday listened to the
tape recordings, he found they were "largely
inaudible" and did not include any incriminating
statements. The indictment was dismissed and
the government conceded that it was liable for
the couple's legal expenses. They were
originally awarded $2.9 million, but the
government appealed and the payment was
cut in half. U.S. v. Aisenberg.
$912,000 was awarded in 2003 to
Houston real estate developer William
Adkinson and two other defendants convicted
in a bank fraud scheme because prosecutors
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2010-09-27-virginia-bank-hyde-amendment_N.htm
10/7/10 2:44 AM
How do I find it? Subscribe to paper
Become a member of the USA
TODAY community now!
Travel Money Sports Life Tech Weather Log in | Become a member
What's this?
The Oval: Tracking the Obama Presidency USA TODAY On Politics Supreme Court Census
Dick Holland Jr. and his
father, Richard, who headed
a community bank in rural
Virginia, were awarded
nearly $1 million to repay
their legal bills after a judge
ruled a federal prosecution
against them had been
"vexatious."
4 E-mail | Save | Print | Reprints & Permissions |
By Kevin McCoy, USA TODAY
Share
WINDSOR, Va. — Richard Holland Jr. beat Yahoo! Buzz
the government — twice.
Add to Mixx
First he was acquitted in a criminal conspiracy
case brought by federal prosecutors. Then he Facebook
forced the Justice Department to help cover
his legal bills. Twitter
Neither victory made up for nearly eight years More
of anguish he suffered when he and his father
Subscribe
were investigated and prosecuted for
allegedly hiding evidence that the small bank myYahoo
they ran in this rural area had made some
iGoogle
improper loans.
Nor did the wins cover all of the Hollands' More
legal bills, even though they got $912,000 under the Hyde
Amendment, a law that requires the Justice Department to
reimburse such costs for wrongly prosecuted defendants. "We
found out the law doesn't repay everything," Holland said.
NOT GUILTY: But stuck with big bills, damaged career
EXPLORE CASES: Investigate the misconduct cases we ID'd
JUSTICE IN BALANCE: Prosecutors' conduct can tip the scales
FULL COVERAGE: Federal prosecutors series
Hyde Amendment cases are rare, and victories are even rarer. A
USA TODAY investigation found just 13 successful cases out of
92 filed since the law's 1997 enactment. The Hollands were
among the first defendants to win reimbursement.
The case against the Hollands began with a 1990 Federal
Deposit Insurance Corp. review of loans to Holland's father,
prominent state Sen. Richard Holland Sr., by the family-led
Farmers Bank. The review ended in a settlement, but the FDIC
began a new investigation in 1991.
The probe concluded the bank had exceeded lending limits on a
few loans to developers, and the FDIC urged federal prosecutors
to pursue criminal charges. In 1997, the Hollands were charged
with hiding evidence about the loans.
The younger Holland, 58, felt compelled to stop teaching Sunday
school for the seven months before the 1998 trial. He readied his
family for the worst, telling them he faced prison.
In contrast with the long investigation, the Hollands' trial ended
Page 1 of 4
Va. bankers scored a rare victory against federal prosecutors - USATODAY.com 10/7/10 2:44 AM

In contrast with the long investigation, the Hollands' trial ended

acted in "bad faith." Their convictions were
reversed after a U.S. court of appeals said the
defendants' actions were not criminal and
prosecutors knew the charges were "contrary
to recent and controlling precedent." The
result, the court said, was that the trial was
"fundamentally unfair." U.S. v. Adkinson.
$391,000 was authorized in 2009 for
Oklahoma businessman John Claro, who was
charged in an alleged scheme to use offshore
insurers to bilk employers of $45 million in
health insurance premiums. The crime
supposedly left many claims unpaid. The
charges were dismissed. The court ordered the
government to pay the defendant's legal fees,
saying prosecutors showed "a reckless
disregard for the truth. The case lacked even a
semblance of responsible work by the
government." The court added: "This is a lot of
money, and it will be paid by the taxpayers'
hard-earned funds." U.S. v. Claro.
$200,480 was paid in 2001 to an Arizona
dairy farmer, Thomas DeJong, acquitted of
violating the federal Clean Water Act. He had
participated in a U.S. Department of
Agriculture soil conservation program. He was
indicted because wastewater had discharged
three times from storage ponds into a dry
streambed on his farm. A district court judge
ruled the government acted in bad faith
because the ponds, designed by the federal
government as part of the soil conservation
program, were "seriously flawed." It noted that
the farmer had spent his own money to correct
the design. U.S. v. DeJong.
abruptly. After the government presented its case and before any
witnesses testified for the defense, U.S. District Judge Henry
Coke Morgan stopped the trial and acquitted the Hollands. It was
the first time the judge had ever pre-empted a jury. "There's no
credible evidence … that either of these defendants are
criminals," Morgan told jurors. In a written order, he called the
case "all smoke and no gun."
Federal prosecutors, the FDIC lawyer and the Justice
Department declined to comment.
The elder Holland returned to the state Senate to a standing
ovation. His son resumed his Sunday school duties.
Their lawyers filed the repayment claim. Morgan ordered the
government to pay, saying "the lack of evidence of criminal intent
was so obvious" that the prosecution had been "vexatious" and
amounted to harassment. Under the Hyde Amendment,
defendants must show a prosecution was vexatious, frivolous or
in bad faith to qualify for compensation.
The money — $500,000 less than the Hollands' total legal bills —
went to the bank, which had loaned them funds to pay their
lawyers pending the trial outcome. Because the case dealt with
their official duties, and they were acquitted, the bank did not
require repayment of the rest of the loan.
The elder Holland lost a battle with cancer even before an
appeals court upheld the Hyde Amendment ruling. His wife had
died earlier during the probe. The younger Holland said the
compensation didn't make up for the way the case darkened his
parents' last days and clouded his own life.

"It was a bittersweet victory," he said. Unlike the prosecutors, he

added, he faced the "risk of losing everything."

You might also be interested in:

Prosecutors' conduct can tip the scales (USATODAY.com in News)
Skyy pushes the envelope with sexy ad campaign (USATODAY.com in Money)
Texting bans may add risk to roads (USATODAY.com in Tech)
British owner of Segway company dies after apparently driving one off a cliff (USATODAY.com in On
Deadline)
Selected for you by a sponsor:

Diary of a Groupon User (Coupon Shoebox)

Yahoo! Buzz Mixx

Posted 9/27/2010 7:56 PM

Updated 9/28/2010 1:36 PM E-mail | Save | Print | Reprints & Permissions |

To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the
newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification.
To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Guidelines: You share in the USA TODAY community, so please keep your comments smart and civil. Don't attack other
readers personally, and keep your language decent. Use the "Report Abuse" button to make a difference. Read more.
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register

Submit Post this comment to Facebook?

Comments: (19) Showing: Newest first New: Most recommended!

ibnrn33yrs (0 friends, send message) wrote: 9/28/2010 12:14:39 PM

i took a course on justice a few years back just for the heck of it; while it was definitely just an intro,
the instructor was a United States Federal Prosecutor. In his opening remarks, he stated, "I am a
federal prosecutor. In one motion, I can screw up your life so bad that you will never recover. I can
freeze your bank accounts, take your money, your home, your assets, destroy your career, ruin your
personal life, and drive you to suicide. How? By filing charges. I don't have to PROVE a thing.
THAT'S how much power I have over you peons."
I actually liked this man a lot; he was a great instructor, but I have never forgotten his words, and
sadly, he was right.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2010-09-27-virginia-bank-hyde-amendment_N.htm Page 2 of 4
Va. bankers scored a rare victory against federal prosecutors - USATODAY.com 10/7/10 2:44 AM

Recommend 6 | Report Abuse

Meekay (6 friends, send message) wrote: 9/28/2010 10:59:57 AM

topdawg (18 friends, send message) wrote: 2h 17m ago
The Hollands should file a personal civil lawsuit against the prosecutors. Overzealous prosecutors
wouldn't be so quick to file charges if they themselves were held personally accountable for their
actions.
--------
They shouldn't even have to file charges. People are reimbursed for wrongful imprisonment when
new evidence is found that clears them. Wrongful Prosecution should result in not only complete
reimbursement to the accused, but a fine against the prosecuter who filed the charges in the first
place with no evidence.

Recommend 5 | Report Abuse

Oversanitized (10 friends, send message) wrote: 9/28/2010 10:29:36 AM

It's almost like our country is being reformatted into a different order. An order that masquerades
within American society, but serves another agenda. These days a president can commit treason, sell
out our economy to other countrys, rewrite administrative laws that erode our founding documents,
but if someone is blatantly wronfully prosecuted by our own government; that person has just become
public enemy number one. The moral here is; do not stand up to a totalitarian government or else.

Recommend 2 | Report Abuse

zappa1999 (0 friends, send message) wrote: 9/28/2010 10:00:37 AM

Our government screwing up and costing us citizens millions in tax dollars?
Noooooooooooooooooooo. Never!

Recommend 1 | Report Abuse

Fh Habit (0 friends, send message) wrote: 9/28/2010 9:19:53 AM

Thanks for the story. I knew Richard Holland and had met his son "Dickie" and sat in on the trial for 2
1/2 days in Norfolk.. During a break the second day we stood out front and talked about the case and
I told Senator Holland''s brother, Dr. Holland of Virginia Beach, and his close friend, William M "Billy".
Camp, "This trial is over." Sure enough, the next day Judge Henry Morgan sent the jury out about
11:30 and turned and chewed the fed prosecutor out for wasting the taxpayer's money and for
bringing such an unfounded case before the court. I was within six feet of the back of the prosecutor
and every bit of skin I could see turned beet red. Well done, Judge Morgan. F Habit, Raleigh

Recommend 5 | Report Abuse

topdawg (18 friends, send message) wrote: 9/28/2010 8:39:31 AM

The Hollands should file a personal civil lawsuit against the prosecutors. Overzealous prosecutors
wouldn't be so quick to file charges if they themselves were held personally accountable for their
actions.

Recommend 2 | Report Abuse

solarized (0 friends, send message) wrote: 9/28/2010 7:39:33 AM

When are those Individual Federal Prosecutors ever going to be held Personally Accountable for
prosecutions that are "vexatious, frivolous or in bad faith"? Until these particular prosecutors are held
accountable for their wrongdoing, then taxpayers are going to continue to be footing the full legal
costs!

Recommend 4 | Report Abuse

Marine1970 (113 friends, send message) wrote: 9/28/2010 7:33:25 AM

Maxx1 (179 friends, send message) wrote: 7h 25m ago
Just another lovely example of our government at work. F'ing up the prosecution (that we paid for),
and having to pay the defendant reimbursement of legal fees for the B.S. prosecution (which we pay
for again). Freakin brilliant.
========================
You don't know the half of it.

They got something called the "Equal Access to Justice Act" which pays illegal aliens lawyers to sue
us.

After the revolution we need to net all these slimy lawyers who bilk the country for millions of dollars
and hang them.

Recommend 3 | Report Abuse

More comments on this story: 1 2 Next

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2010-09-27-virginia-bank-hyde-amendment_N.htm Page 3 of 4
Va. bankers scored a rare victory against federal prosecutors - USATODAY.com 10/7/10 2:44 AM

Newspaper Home Delivery - Subscribe Today

Home • News • Travel • Money • Sports • Life • Tech • Weather

About USATODAY.com: Site Map | FAQ | Contact Us | Jobs with Us | Terms of Service
Privacy Policy/Your California Privacy Right | Advertise | Press Room | Media Lounge | Reprints and Permissions

News Your Way: Mobile News | Email News | Add USATODAY.com RSS feeds | Twitter | Podcasts | Widgets

Partners: USA WEEKEND | Sports Weekly | Education | Space.com | Travel Tips

Copyright 2010 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2010-09-27-virginia-bank-hyde-amendment_N.htm Page 4 of 4