Anchorage Daily News

WASHINGTON -- Lawyers for Sen. Ted Stevens signaled Tuesday they'll try to keep jurors from hearing as many as 105 phone calls the FBI recorded as part of the investigation that led to the 84-year-old Alaska Republican's indictment on corruption charges.

The phone calls appear to be among the thousands of hours of secretly recorded phone taps and video surveillance that have helped prosecutors land seven convictions and guilty pleas in the sweeping multiyear probe of corruption in Alaska politics. In at least one of the cases, jurors said the recordings -- which showcase crude talk and salty exchanges between lobbyists and state lawmakers -- were key to their guilty verdict.

The senator goes to trial Sept. 24 on seven counts of lying on his annual financial disclosure reports about gifts and home repairs he allegedly received from an oil services company and its CEO, Bill Allen. A judge granted an expedited trial so that Stevens could face a jury before the Nov. 4 election. Stevens, who won a Republican primary last week, faces Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich, a Democrat, in the general election.

His lawyers on Tuesday continued to shore up their defense of the senator, filing motions that criticized prosecutors for a vaguely written indictment and for insinuating that Stevens took bribes. The government "obviously wishes to import the stench of a bribery prosecution into a case that is nothing of the sort," wrote Stevens' lawyers.

Stevens' lawyers complained in documents that prosecutors dumped more than 400 hours of video and audio evidence on them last month, but little of it was related to Stevens. Only 105 of the 2,800 intercepted phone calls feature Stevens, his lawyers wrote in motions filed Tuesday.

They also said the Justice Department didn't specifically name the senator as a "targeted interceptee" in the affidavits they submitted to a court seeking permission for wiretaps. As a result, they may to seek to keep a jury from hearing those recordings, one of his lawyers, Robert Cary, wrote in motions filed Tuesday. They're asking for detailed logs that show the government made every effort to avoid recording noncriminal conversations and people who weren't named in orders authorizing the wiretaps.

FLORIDA DEAL TIE-IN

Last week, his lawyers accused prosecutors of unfairly introducing "irrelevant and prejudicial evidence" that has nothing to do with the disclosure violations he faces.

His attorneys are referring to how prosecutors revealed that a friend loaned Stevens $31,000 in 2001 that let him turn a $5,000 investment in an unbuilt Florida condo into a $103,000 profit. He faces no charges in connection with the allegation.

However, prosecutors argued Tuesday in their own motions that they intend to introduce the information at trial because it is directly related to charges he faces in connection with repairs to his home in Girdwood. Stevens took out a line of credit on his Girdwood home to pay for Veco repairs, prosecutors said.

They said they'll be showing that even as Allen and Veco helped Stevens by "doing free work on the Girdwood residence," another friend helped defray the home repair expenses the senator paid to non-Veco workers by "providing him with a virtually-no-risk real estate investment that covered Stevens' line of credit."

The information about the "no-risk" Florida real estate deal is "relevant to establishing Stevens' knowledge and intent concerning his personal investments and financial status," prosecutors wrote.

SPEECH-OR-DEBATE CONFLICTS

Stevens' lawyers on Tuesday also continued to press their case for throwing out the indictment based on the speech-or-debate clause of the U.S. Constitution, which bars the government prosecutors from using speeches and legislation introduced by members of Congress as evidence. Prosecutors said that evidence protected by legislative immunity granted by the Constitution was not shown to the grand jury that ultimately indicted Stevens.

But Stevens' lawyers said they believe the grand jurors did see protected material, and they've asked for permission to review transcripts of what prosecutors presented in the secret sessions.

That would mirror what government lawyers have done in the Rep. William Jefferson case, Stevens' lawyers said in their motions. Jefferson, a Louisiana Democrat, faces bribery charges. In Jefferson's case, his lawyers were given permission to review grand jury testimony of the congressman's legislative aides to determine whether there are speech or debate conflicts. A judge reviewed the remaining transcripts for conflicts.

Prosecutors continued to maintain in their filings that that the evidence of "official or political actions" by Stevens will "be limited to such routinely admissible categories as constituent services or communication with government agencies."

U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan will hear all of the pretrial motions next week. Sullivan has already ruled that the trial will stay in Washington D.C. instead of moving to Alaska.