This is a narrative summary of the 30 criminal counts in the indictment on which the jury, on December 2, 1998, acquitted the defendant in United States v. Alphonso Michael Espy. The following breaks down those counts by the criminal charges alleged in the redacted indictment:

$ eight counts of deprivation of honest services by mail and wire fraud -- counts 1 through 8;

$ ten counts of accepting gratuities in violation of the federal gratuities statute (18 U.S.C. '201(c)) -- counts 9 through 18;

$ three counts of accepting illegal gratuities in violation of the Meat Inspection Act -- counts 19 through 21;

$ four counts of traveling in interstate commerce to violate the Meat Inspection Act and federal gratuities statute -- counts 22 through 25;

$ one count of false statements to the USDA-OIG regarding travel involving gifts received from prohibited sources -- count 26;

$ one count of directing a subordinate to falsify travel itinerary in response to a request from USDA investigators -- count 27;

$ one count of false statements to government agents concealing the source of his illegal gifts -- count 28; and

$ two counts of false statements resulting from Espy=s failure to disclose $12,752 in gifts on financial disclosure forms filed for 1993 and 1994 -- counts 29 and 30.

Below is an overview of these counts. A detailed discussion of the Government=s argument in support of the evidence and allegations is available by reading the Government=s Opposition to the Defendant=s Motion for Acquittal filed November 23, 1998, which the Government filed at the conclusion of its case. You also may find the Government=s Opposition at Indictments index under the original Espy indictment.

The original indictment contained 39 counts. In pretrial motions to dismiss, the trial court dismissed four counts -- one count of false statements to President Clinton=s Chief of Staff and White House Counsel and three counts of accepting illegal gratuities under Meat Inspection Act. The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reinstated the three Meat Inspection Act counts. At the conclusion of the Government=s case, the trial court dismissed eight counts leaving the 30 counts for the jury to decide.

These 30 counts of the Indictment alleged three categories of criminal misconduct by the former Secretary of Agriculture:

1. He took things of value from regulated entities, directly or indirectly, in violation of the ethical regulations and criminal statutes that prohibited public officials from accepting such things; and

2. He failed to disclose on the Public Financial Disclosure Forms (SF-278), that he was required by law to file annually, those things of value that he received; and

3. When federal investigators from the Department of Agriculture=s Office of Inspector General and the Federal Bureau of Investigation questioned him about his acceptance of these gifts and favors, he made false statements and submitted altered documents to the investigators.

The balance of the discussion gives you an idea of what the Government was required to prove Abeyond a reasonable doubt.@ The elements of the offenses derive directly from the instructions that the trial court gave to the jury. You may view many of the instructions given by the trial court to the jury by clicking here or returning to the Indictments index and clicking on the jury instructions under the Espy redacted indictment.

Counts 1 through 8 charged Espy with accepting 18 different things of value from corporations and individuals that he regulated and concealing those gifts, in violation of the mail and wire fraud statutes: 18 U.S.C. '' 1341, 1343, and 1346. The Court required the Government to prove that Espy:

FIRST: devised or participated in a scheme to deprive the United States of its right to his honest services, or to obtain money or property through false representations or promises; and

SECOND: did so knowingly and wilfully, with the specific intent to defraud; and

THIRD: in furtherance of this scheme, used the mails or interstate wires, or caused the mails or interstate wires to be used as specified in the corresponding counts in the indictment.

To prove a Adeprivation of honest services@ the Court required the government to show that Espy either:

(1) intentionally failed to comply with the requirements of the Financial Disclosure Form, SF-278, with respect to the gifts received from persons or entities over which he had decision-making power, or

(2) failed to comply with the required ethical regulations by intentionally receiving anything of value from persons or entities over which he had decision making power and then failing to disclose such a conflict of interest to the Department of Agriculture.

Counts one through four, the wire fraud violations, were (1) May 4, 1993 telephone communications between the USDA in Washington and Tyson Foods in Springdale, Arkansas, to accept Tyson Foods= invitation to a weekend birthday party hosted by Tyson Foods; (2) a May 12, 1993 fax between Tyson Foods in Springdale, Arkansas and the USDA in Washington to provide Espy=s travel and lodging arrangements for the weekend birthday party hosted by Tyson Foods; (3) June 17, 1993 telephone communications between the USDA in Washington and Quaker Oats headquarters in Chicago, Illinois to solicit two 1993 NBA Championship tickets from Quaker Oats for Espy; and (4) a February 4, 1994 fax from the President of Oglethorpe Power, in Tucker, Georgia to Espy at the USDA in Washington requesting that Espy elevate to other government officials Oglethorpe Power=s proposal to pre-pay USDA-guaranteed bonds after the administering federal bank within the Department of the Treasury previously rejected Oglethorpe=s prepayment proposal.

Counts 5 through 8, the mail fraud violations, were (1) (Count 5) an April 6, 1993 purchase order for $6,204 for the period of February 1993 through September 1993 sent from the USDA in Washington to Chrysler Credit in Ridgeland, Mississippi for the lease of a 1993 Jeep Grand Cherokee; (2) (Count 6) a March 18, 1994 handwritten note from Espy in Washington to Don Tyson in Springdale, Arkansas with a $68 personal check as payment for the January 16, 1994 Dallas Cowboys - Green Bay Packers NFL Playoff game; (3) (Count 7) a June 2, 1994 letter from the Speaking/Travel Coordinator at USDA in Washington to the Arkansas Poultry Federation in Little Rock, Arkansas containing Espy=s personal check in the approximate amount of $69 for lodging expenses at the Tyson Management Development Center on May 15, 1993; and (4) (Count 8) an August 25, 1994 letter from Espy to Quaker Oats in Chicago, Illinois stating that tickets to the Chicago Bulls - Phoenix Suns NBA Playoff game in Chicago that the Chairman of Quaker Oats provided to Espy and Richard Douglas had not been repaid due to an oversight, and contained Espy=s personal check for $90.

Counts 9 through 18 charged Espy, a public official, with accepting gratuities in violation of 18 U.S.C. ' 201(c)(1)(B). To prove those offenses, the Court required the Government to prove that Espy:

FIRST: otherwise than as provided by law for the proper discharge of his official duty, directly or indirectly demanded, sought, received or accepted something of value personally; and

SECOND: received the thing of value knowingly (voluntarily and deliberately, rather than mistakenly or inadvertently) and wilfully (intentionally and purposely, rather than accidentally); and

THIRD: was a public official or a person who had been selected to be a public official when he received the gratuity; and

FOURTH: received the thing of value for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by him.

To prove that Espy accepted or received the things of value Afor or because of official acts@ the government had to prove that Espy knew that the giver of the gratuity intended either:

(1) to reward some past concrete official act or acts, or

(2) to enhance the likelihood of some future act or acts.

The element of Afor or because of official acts@ did not require the jury to find that the thing of value was accepted as a quid pro quo, or in return for the performance of a specific official act. Similarly, the Government did not have to show that Espy altered any decision or action because of the receipt of a gratuity. It was not a defense to the crime of receiving or accepting a gratuity as charged in Counts Nine through Eighteen of the Indictment that the official act performed or to be performed was actually lawful, desirable, or even beneficial to the public.

Additionally, the Government was not required to show that the gratuity and the official act motivated one another. Rather, it was enough for the Government to show that Espy knew that the giver hoped that his gratuity would affect a future official act taken by Espy. It was not enough, however, for the Government to show that Espy believed that the giver of any gratuity hoped merely to Aget cozy@ or Ainduce warm feelings@ towards Espy by giving the thing of value.

The Court further instructed the jury that it would have been improper to find Espy guilty of the gratuities offenses if it found that he believed that he received any of the gratuities solely because of his personal relationship or friendship with the donor, or if it found that Espy believed that the donor gave, and he received, any of the gratuities alleged in the Indictment merely because of his position as Secretary of Agriculture.

The illegal gratuities charged in Counts 9 through 18 were the following: four illegal gratuities from Sun-Diamond Growers of California and Richard Douglas -- (Count 9) luggage given on March 14, 1993 valued at $2,427, (Count 10) cash in the amount of #3,200 given on May 13, 1993 to Patricia Dempsey, Espy=s girlfriend, (Count 11) U.S. Open tennis tickets and limousines given on September 11 and 12, 1993 valued at $4,446, and (Count 12) tickets to a Washington Bullets-New York Knicks NBA Game given on November 10, 1993 valued at $222; three illegal gratuities from Tyson Foods and its Washington lobbyist Jack Williams -- (Count 13) four seats at a Presidential Inaugural Dinner given on January 18, 1993 valued at $6,000, (Count 14) the Tyson birthday party celebration in Russellville, Arkansas, including airfare, meals, lodging and entertainment, given May 14 through 16, 1993 valued at $2,556, and (Count 15) a weekend trip to Dallas, Texas for Espy and Dempsey, including Dempsey=s airfare, and limousines and football game tickets to the Dallas Cowboys - Green Bay Packers NFL Playoff Football Game for Espy and Dempsey given January 15 and 16, 1994 valued at $2,087; (Count 16) one Super Bowl ticket given to Espy by Oglethorpe Power, EOP Group, and Smith Barney on January 30, 1994 valued at $2,200 (the price paid to a ticket scalper for the ticket); (Count 17) employment that commenced on May 1, 1993 for Dempsey from the EOP Group; and (Count 18) tickets to the Chicago Bulls-Phoenix Suns NBA Championship Game on June 18, 1993 from Quaker Oats and its Chairman valued at $90.

Counts 19 through 21 charged Espy with violating the gratuities provision of the Meat Inspection Act, 21 U.S.C. ' 622. To prove that offense, the government was required to prove that Espy:

FIRST: knowingly and wilfully received or accepted a thing of value from any person, firm, or corporation engaged in commerce, given with any purpose or intent whatsoever; and

SECOND: occupied the position of Secretary of Agriculture at the time of his receipt of the thing of value; and

THIRD: accepted the thing of value in connection with, or arising out of, the performance of official duties.

To prove that Espy accepted or received the things of value Ain connection with or arising out of the performance of his official duties@ the government had to prove that Espy knew that:

(1) the giver was a person or entity regulated by the USDA, and

(2) the giver gave the thing of value in connection with Espy=s status as Secretary of Agriculture.

The violations of the Meat Inspection Act were (Count 19) the Russellville, Arkansas, weekend in May 1993, which included airfare, meals, lodging and entertainment, from Tyson Foods; (Count 20) the airfare, and limousines and football game tickets to the Dallas Cowboys - Green Bay Packers NFL Playoff Football Game from Tyson Foods in January 1994; and (Count 21) the Chicago Bulls-Phoenix Suns NBA Championship Game tickets from Quaker Oats and its Chairman in June 1993.

Counts 22 through 25 charged Espy with violating the Travel Act, 18 U.S.C. ' 1952, by traveling in interstate commerce with the intent to facilitate the promotion of unlawful activities. To prove the Travel Act violations, the Government had to prove that Espy:

FIRST: traveled in interstate commerce;

SECOND: did such travel with the specific intent to promote, manage, establish or carry on, or to facilitate the promotion, management, establishment or carrying on of the unlawful activity described in the Indictment; and

THIRD: after the interstate travel, knowingly and deliberately, did an act, or attempted to do an act, in order to promote, manage, establish, or carry on the unlawful activity.

The Government alleged that Espy traveled interstate on four occasions to violate the federal illegal gratuities statute -- (Count 22) on May 15, 1993

from Washington to Russellville to attend the Tyson party; (Count 23) on June 18, 1993; (Count 24) on September 11, 1993 from Washington to New York to attend the U.S. Open tennis tournament; and (Count 25) on January 15, 1994 from Washington to Dallas to attend the Cowboys-Packers NFL playoff game.

Counts 26 and 28 through 30 charged Espy with making false statements and submitting false documents to the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. ' 1001. These charges stemmed from his false statements to agents of the Department of Agriculture=s Office of Inspector General and to special agents of the FBI, as well as his submission of false Public Financial Disclosure Reports on forms SF-278. To prove those offenses, the government had to prove that Espy:

FIRST: (A) made a false, fictitious or fraudulent statement; or

(B) falsified, concealed, or covered up by a trick, scheme or device a fact that he had a duty to disclose; or

(C) made or used a false writing or document containing a false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation; and

SECOND: in so doing, acted knowingly and wilfully; and

THIRD: the matter was within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States; and

FOURTH: the fact concealed, or the false document made or used was material.

Whether a the fact concealed or false document made was material depends on whether it could have influenced the government=s decisions or activities. There was no requirement that the Government prove that the receiving department or agency was in fact misled. The fact concealed or the document made or used must simply have had the capacity to impair or pervert the functioning of the government department.

Count 27 charged Espy with tampering with a witness, specifically his assistant Eloise Thomas, in violation of 18 U.S.C. '' 1512(b)(2)(A) and (B) and 1512(b)(3). To prove that offense, the Government had to prove that Espy:

FIRST: knowingly engaged in misleading conduct toward another person; and

SECOND: did so specifically intending to either:

(A) cause or induce that person to withhold a record or document from an official proceeding; or

(B) cause or induce that person to alter or conceal an object with the specific intent to impair the object=s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding.