JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC

“Stunning.”

That’s how Fox4 News is describing The Star’s big story, which went up online yesterday afternoon, about former Jackson County Executive Mike Sanders’ alleged involvement in a kickback scheme that supposedly went on for at least three years.

Indeed, it is a stunning story…And, by the way, Fox4 is the only one of the four local TV stations, as far as I can tell, to have followed up on it — which tells me how useless the other three stations are.

Just reading this 44-column-inch-long story, it would appear the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office have the goods on Sanders. Somehow, reporters Mike Hendricks and Steve Vockrodt got the central figure in the drama, a Northland resident named Steve Hill, to open up about how the scheme worked. It went like this: Sanders would have checks drawn on the account of a political committee he controlled, then would give the checks to Hill, who would cash them, keep some of the proceeds and give the rest to Sanders.

It looks cut and dried…But you can bet it won’t be. Seldom is it easy to prove a kickback scheme against prominent and influential political figures. They usually have money, and they always get top-notch attorneys.

But that’s not the only reason this is unlikely to be a prosecutorial slam dunk. The Star’s story contains two direct suggestions of the difficulty the government is facing, and there are other signals between the lines.

Take a look.

Four years

That’s how long the FBI has been investigating this case. It’s right there in black and white: “The arrangement is the subject of a federal investigation that may be coming to a close after more than four years, The Star has learned.”

If that is correct, it tells you one of two things: The FBI has been moving at an absolute snail’s pace or it’s a lot more complicated than Sanders giving a guy checks and divvying up the proceeds between himself and the stooge. For the FBI’s sake I’m going to assume the latter — more complicated than it appears — and suggest that authorities do not have an iron-clad case.

While we’re on the subject of the length of the investigation, I want to add a journalistic comment: If The Star still had a reporter going to U.S. District Court every day, checking with officials and working sources, it would not have taken four years to discover that a former county executive was being investigated. Hendricks and Vockrodt are two of the best reporters The Star has, but they function primarily as at-large troubleshooters, responding to whatever they hear, wherever. Because of staff cutbacks, The Star has largely abandoned the longstanding, tried-and-true “beat” system, where reporters are assigned to narrow coverage areas and work those areas relentlessly. As a result, The Star doesn’t break nearly as many stories as it did before it started laying off editorial staff members in 2008.

Sanders might not be the only target

Two other people who conceivably could be in trouble are named in the story. One is Calvin Williford, Sanders’ former chief of staff. The other is J. Martin Kerr, an Independence attorney and friend of Sanders, who was treasurer of the political committee that was being used as the cash conduit. Interestingly, Kerr was an assistant Jackson County prosecutor in the 1970s. Both Williford and Kerr have hired attorneys. (I love it when an attorney has to hire his own attorney.) The possibility that at least four people were involved in some manner could lead to a lot of finger-pointing and messiness.

Main witness credibility

The Star’s story does not tell us a lot about Steve Hill, except that he lives north of the river, has been a friend of Sanders since high school, and has used a wheelchair since he suffered a broken neck during an assault 30 years ago. The dearth of information about Hill raises questions, including whether he has ever been convicted of a crime and why he decided to tell The Star his story before charges have even been filed.

If he has been convicted of a crime, or has a history of lying, it would damage his credibility. That’s a given, and I wish Hendricks and Vockrodt would have addressed that.

Regarding his decision to talk to Hendricks and Vockrodt, the story says he came forward “because he wanted the truth to be known and discovered.” I seriously doubt that is the sole reason. I suspect self-preservation is also a major factor. I don’t think he would have gone to The Star unless he felt it would benefit him in some way.

The FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office cannot be happy with this turn of events. Investigators and prosecutors strongly encourage witnesses to keep their mouths shut until charges are filed and cases go to trial. They want the damning testimony to come from the witness stand, not from the front page of the daily paper.

A final, significant complicating factor for the government is that unless Hill’s account in the newspaper coincides perfectly — step by step, offense by offense — with what he testifies to in court, a defense attorney will be able to use any disparities to “impeach” his testimony.

In any event, Steve Hill’s credibility is going to be called into question. The easy part was talking to The Star and its very receptive reporters. It’s going to be a whole different story if and when a defense attorney pounces on him like a junkyard dog.