Former FBI agent Lindley DeVecchio, who was freed on all mob-related murder charges, lashed out at Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes today for making his life a living hell.
“I will never forgive the Brooklyn D.A. for irresponsibly pursuing this case after being warned by others that this one witntess was untrustworthy and had told numerous inconsistensent stories.
“They failed to take the most basic steps to verify their source, preferring to ‘shoot first, ask questions later.’ My question is: ‘Where do I go to get my reputation back?’
“After almost two years, this nightmare is over. It has consumed me emotionally, drained me financially, and it has tested my faith in the system I spent 30 years of my life defending.”
He said, “I was very relieved. Yes, I was very relieved when I heard the case was dismissed. It’s been a very long 18 months for me, or more, actually.
“My wife Carolyn and I are now looking forward to slowly driving home to Florida, and moving on. I can’t wait to take my Harley out for a long ride – and return to the gym to work off the pounds I accumulated sitting in Court for the last month.”
Prosecutors abruptly dropped the case against him after their star witness, Linda Schiro, a mobster’s moll, may have lied on the stand about Lindley giving deadly information to the Mafia.
Her testimony was thrown into question when interview tapes emerged that showed her giving a different story.
Jim Kossler, one of several ex-FBI agents who remained firmly in DeVecchio’s corner throughout and was among dozens of G-men who applauded in court when the judge dismissed the case said, “We all knew he was innocent. This never should have happened. Never.”
Meanwhile, Brooklyn DA Charles Hynes said he was seeking a special prosecutor to investigate the bungled case.
Hynes said he signed a request for a special DA “to investigate the circumstances involving mob moll Linda Schiro’s testimony.”
“There wouldn’t have been a prosecution if we had these tapes. It’s that simple. We would not have prosecuted because it would have been so damaging to the central part of our case it would have been unthinkable to proceed,” he said.
“I guess the worst thing is that I wish we had the information at an earlier time where we could have evaluated it and then made a judgment,” said Hynes. “There’s no way we would have brought a prosecution if we had that kind of information.
“On the other hand I think justice was served and that’s what the system is supposed to be about,” said Hynes.
The stunning legal collapse took place with amazing speed after reports surfaced late Tuesday that Schiro, had given an interview in 1997 in which she specifically cleared DeVecchio of two murders and failed to mention him in connection with a third.
“There’s no question that she perjured herself in the grand jury and on the witness stand this week,” said DeVecchio lawyer Mark Bederow after listening to the tapes. “It’s not even close to consistent.”
Hynes said he would look into whether his office would press charges against Schiro.
“We’re sending it over to have the special district attorney review the testimony and tapes and make a judgment,” he said.
When asked if DeVecchio was completely out of the woods now, Hynes said, “Oh, absolutely, absolutely. The case was built on circumstantial evidence which included the number of FBI agents who worked for him and direct evidence of her testimony, which up until the other day we had reason to believe.”
Hynes added, that he didn’t blame Village Voice reporter Tom Robbins from withholding the interview tapes until now.
“I don’t blame anyone. I just repeat I’m sorry that I did not have this information earlier so I could have made an evaluation and there certainly would not have been a prosecution if I had this information.”
At state Supreme Court this morning, chief prosecutor, Michael Vecchione said, “I have to say that had we been provided with these tapes much earlier in this process. I dare say that we would not be here trying this case over the last several weeks.”
He then asked for dismissal of all the charges.
In a light- hearted moment, Justice Gustin Reichbach turned to the defense table and said, “I don’t suppose you have much to say about this.”
But on a serious note, Reichbach also lashed out at the FBI.
“That a thug like Scarpa would be employed by the federal government to beat witnesses and threaten them at gunpoint to obtain information … is a shocking demonstration of the government’s unacceptable willingness to employ criminality to fight crime,” the judge said, referring to Scarpa reportedly assisting the FBI in finding the bodies of slain civil rights workers in 1964.
“In the face of the obvious menace posed by organized crime the FBI was ready despite its own regulations to the contrary to make its own deal with the devil.”
A beaming DeVecchio, who has been free on $ 1 million bail, said outside court yesterday, “I feel good.”
The former FBI agent can never be tried again on any of the charges.
Instead, “The inconsistencies are so devastating that it’s just game, set, match,” said one source. “Even without the tapes, it was a tough case.”
Village Voice reporter Tom Robbins, who spoke with Schiro in 1997, summarized the tapes’ contents in a story Tuesday on the weekly’s Web site.
For example, on the 1992 murder of rival Colombo soldier Larry Lampasi, Schiro told the Voice, “So that, Lin didn’t do . . . I know that for a fact.”
In court, she testified that DeVecchio got the victim’s address and morning routine so that Scarpa could kill him.
“Greg put up his thumb and said it was good information,” she said.
The news brought the trial to a sudden halt yesterday, with the judge warning Schiro that she was at risk for a perjury charge and assigning her a court-appointed lawyer.
Schiro’s daughter, also named Linda, said her mother did not want to comment last night. But she did defend her mom, saying, “She wasn’t under oath at the time [that she spoke to the reporter.] She was under no obligation to tell the truth.”
She added, “What she says in court in front of a judge is the truth.”
Prosecutors announced the case in March 2006, with Hynes calling it “the most stunning example of official corruption that I have ever seen.”
The allegations were that DeVecchio had leaked sensitive information to his prized Colombo family source, Gregory “The Grim Reaper” Scarpa, that resulted in four gangland murders.
As the case slowly made its way to trial, it became more apparent that it rested almost completely on the word of Schiro, Scarpa’s longtime girlfriend, who claimed she’d been present for the conversations.
Her testimony on Monday appeared credible, and although zealous cross-examination by lawyer Douglas Grover on Tuesday revealed inconsistencies, it seemed to leave the basic core of facts intact.
Then came the tapes.
Sources familiar with the tapes said Schiro specifically says DeVecchio had nothing to do with the 1987 murder of Scarpa protégé-gone-bad Joseph “Joe Brewster” DeDomenico, nor with the 1992 killing of Lampasi.
She also fails to mention DeVecchio in connection with the 1984 murder of mob moll Mary Bari.
Although Schiro does connect him to the 1990 killing of her son’s best friend, Patrick Porco, sources said there were glaring inconsistencies in the two versions. In 1997, she told Robbins that DeVecchio came to Scarpa’s 82nd Street home to discuss killing Porco.
On Monday, she testified that it was a warning by phone.
A source said Schiro never mentioned the 1997 interview tapes in scores of meetings with prosecutors in the early days of the case. He said investigators were totally blindsided when the Robbins story hit the Internet.
Prosecutors have been paying her $2,200 a month for rent and food since March 2006.
“It’s not just stubbornness,” a source close to the investigation. “I still kind of believe her. But you just can’t go forward. I feel bad for the Porcos, because if you believe the People’s case, that’s the one consistent part.”
Mary Bari’s sister, who did not want to give her name, said she didn’t know what the truth was.
“I don’t know what to believe,” said the sister, who did not want to give her name. “Nothing will bring her back. If he’s guilty, maybe when he dies he’ll be punished in the final judgment.”