Tragic (43 page)

Amaya glared once more at Karp and then looked up at the ceiling like a petulant child.

Judge See crooked a finger to summon two security officers. “Mr. Amaya, I’m holding you in contempt of court. You’ll be escorted from this courtroom and held in the Tombs until I’ve had a chance to deal with you.” Turning to the jury, he said, “I’m directing
you to disregard this witness’s entire testimony.” He then looked to where Kowalski and Vitteli sat tight-lipped. “Mr. Kowalski, call your next witness.”

“We call Martin Bryant,” Kowalski said, ignoring the scene of Amaya being escorted from the courtroom by the security officers. The defense attorney looked over at Karp and furrowed his brow as the prosecutor began leafing through some papers before leaning over to whisper to Guma, who got up and left the courtroom.

“Mr. Bryant is an attorney with the complaints division of the U.S. Department of Labor in Washington, D.C., and, although unnamed, has been referenced by Mr. Karp during this trial, as well as interviewed by Detective Fulton. The People are well aware of his relationship to this case,” Kowalski argued.

Judge See sighed. It was normal, particularly in a murder case, to grant the defense more leeway than the prosecution, and this was one of those times. “I’m going to allow it,” he said.

A minute later, a balding, mousy-looking man with round, wire-rim glasses entered the courtroom and froze until instructed by the judge to come forward and be sworn in. He then climbed up on the witness stand and sat there blinking rapidly and adjusting his glasses as Kowalski approached the stand. “Mr. Bryant, do you recall meeting with Vince Carlotta and Mahlon Gorman in the late fall of last year?” the defense attorney asked.

“I have a vague recollection of a very short meeting with them,” Bryant replied.

“Can you give the jury a synopsis of what the meeting entailed?”

Bryant swallowed and nodded. “As I recall, it was mostly informational,” he said. “They had some concerns about a recent election of the North American Brotherhood of Stevedores union and wanted to know what their options were as far as the federal government’s possible involvement.”

“Did they mention anyone with the union in particular whose actions concerned them?”

“I recall one,” Bryant replied, blinking even more rapidly.
“They apparently had some concerns about the union’s chief financial officer, Jackie Corcione.”

At the mention of Corcione’s name, the gallery of the courtroom buzzed. But Karp sat impassively as Kowalski asked his next question. “Did they say how their concerns about Corcione and the election were related?”

“Well, they didn’t have any evidence, at least nothing they showed me,” Bryant said, “but my recollection was that there was some concern that Corcione might have been stealing from the union pension fund and that he was worried about an audit if Mr. Carlotta became president.”

“But Corcione wasn’t worried about an audit with Mr. Vitteli as president?”

Bryant nodded. “I asked them that, but apparently they felt that Mr. Corcione had pulled the wool over Mr. Vitteli’s eyes. If I understand the dynamics right, Mr. Vitteli was very loyal to the union founder, Leo Corcione, and perhaps blind in that regard as far as the senior Corcione’s son.”

“So were you able to answer their questions?”

“As far as I know,” Bryant said with a shrug. “I told them that due to the Landrum-Griffin Act, the federal government—i.e., the Labor Department—couldn’t legally get involved until they’d exhausted all their remedies through the union’s own processes.”

“Did they seem satisfied with your answer?”

“I don’t know if they were happy,” Bryant replied. “But it’s the law and I think they understood that.”

“Did you hear from Mr. Carlotta or his attorney, Mahlon Gorman, again?”

“No. The next thing I heard was that Mr. Carlotta had been killed during the course of a robbery.”

“Were you aware that in the meantime, Mr. Carlotta filed a formal complaint with the union and that an investigation was conducted?” Kowalski asked.

“Not until well after the fact,” Bryant replied.

“When did you learn about the investigation conducted by the union?”

“I was told about it by Mr. Vitteli,” Bryant said.

“When was this?”

“In June, after the trial.”

“The trial of Alexei Bebnev and Frank DiMarzo, who were convicted of Mr. Carlotta’s murder?”

“I don’t know the names, but yes.”

“And what was the purpose of your contact with Mr. Vitteli?”

“He contacted me,” Bryant said. “He said he had some concerns that Mr. Carlotta might have been correct about irregularities in the union election.”

“Was there anyone in particular he mentioned?”

“Yes. Jackie Corcione.”

“Did Mr. Vitteli tell you what he felt was amiss?”

Bryant adjusted his glasses again and nodded. “It was similar to what I was told by Mr. Carlotta. He believed there were some indications that Mr. Corcione was trying to prevent an audit by Mr. Carlotta.”

“Who was in charge of the union investigation?”

“It’s my understanding that Mr. Corcione was in charge.”

The murmurs that had swept back and forth across the gallery increased in volume. “What did you tell him?”

“Again, the law requires that any such grievances be handled by the union’s own bylaws and practices before the Labor Department would get involved,” Bryant said. “I discussed the law with Mr. Vitteli and he agreed to reopen the union investigation into the alleged election irregularities, as well as an audit of the union accounts.”

“Do you know if either of these occurred?”

“I don’t know,” Bryant said. “Mr. Vitteli was arrested a short time later, and there was no further contact with my office until I received a subpoena from you.”

Kowalski walked over to the defense table and picked up three
sets of papers, one of which he deposited on the prosecution table before returning to the witness stand. “Mr. Bryant, did you take any notes or recordings of your first meeting with Mr. Carlotta and Mr. Gorman?”

Bryant shook his head. “No. As I said, it was mostly informational.”

“What about the subsequent meeting with Mr. Vitteli? Did you take notes of that meeting?”

“I did,” Bryant agreed. “Not many but some.”

“Why did you take notes of this second meeting but not the first with Mr. Gorman and Mr. Carlotta?”

“Well, several reasons,” Bryant said. “Obviously, the murder of Mr. Carlotta got my attention, especially after hearing from Mr. Vitteli. And this was the second time I’d heard similar allegations.”

Kowalski handed a set of the papers to Bryant. “Do you recognize these papers?”

“Um, yes,” Bryant said as he leafed through his set. “This appears to be a copy of the originals of my notes from my discussion with Mr. Vitteli.”

“I noticed that these notes are mostly a word or two, sometimes three,” Kowalski said, looking at his copy. “For instance, I see ‘Corcione,’ followed by a fairly large space and then ‘voting irregularities.’ And then there are the words ‘pension funds’ and ‘Cayman Islands.’ A little farther down I see, ‘Joey Barros’ with a question mark. And finally a statement, ‘Vince was right,’ with an exclamation point.”

“Yes. Those are my notes and they fit with my recollection of my discussion with Mr. Vitteli.”

Kowalski turned to Karp. “No more questions, your witness.”

Sitting for a moment, studying the witness, Karp furrowed his brow. He then rose from his seat and made his way to the jury rail. “So my understanding is that Mr. Carlotta and Mr. Gorman traveled to Washington, D.C., for a short informational meeting with you?”

Licking his lips nervously, Bryant nodded. “Yes, that’s correct.”

“And they mentioned issues with the election and some concerns about Jackie Corcione?”

“Yes.”

“And you told them that because of the Landrum-Griffin Act, they had to first go through the union grievance process?”

“Yes.”

“And to your knowledge, that’s what happened?”

“Yes.”

“Do you remember the date of that meeting.”

“Not precisely. Sometime in the latter part of November.”

“Would November eighteenth sound about right?”

“Yes. That’s about what I was thinking.”

“Then in June, following the trial of Alexei Bebnev and Frank DiMarzo, you testified that the defendant also contacted you with similar concerns regarding the election and Jackie Corcione, and something to do with Joey Barros?”

Bryant shoved his glasses back up his nose. “That’s correct.”

“Was that the first time the defendant contacted you or you him?”

“Yes. I believe so.”

“You don’t know?”

“No, I do. That was the first time.”

“Did you file a report regarding the defendant’s concerns regarding the election, Jackie Corcione, or Joey Barros?”

“Um, no.”

“Why not? You said there were several reasons, including the murder of Vince Carlotta, that you took notes of this meeting. But it didn’t warrant filing any sort of official report?”

Bryant pulled a handkerchief from his back pocket and dabbed at his forehead. “I was waiting to see what would become of Mr. Vitteli’s efforts to reopen the union investigation.”

“I see,” Karp said as he returned to the prosecution table, where he picked up a thick brown manual. “Mr. Bryant, does the
U.S. Department of Labor have any sort of rules and procedures about what to do in a case like this?”

Seeing what Karp had in his hand caused Bryant to swallow hard several times. “Um, yes, and I see that you have a copy of our department manual.”

“Yes, this book,” Karp said, holding it up, “is the U.S. Department of Labor manual dealing with, among other things, the protocol to be followed by your office in regard to complaints. You’re familiar with it?”

“Yes.”

“Then are you aware of Section Twenty-Four B that states that such complaints, whether they’re verbal or formal written complaints, be noted and a report filed with a supervisor?”

Bryant tried to smile but it looked more like a nervous grin. “Actually, that’s more of a guideline than strict protocol.”

Placing the manual on the jury rail, Karp opened it. “I’m reading here from page 241 that, and I quote, ‘any contact with union representatives or union members regarding potential malfeasance and/or criminal conduct involving union management be reported by the grievance officer to his direct supervisor.’ Does that sound familiar?”

“I’m aware of that section,” Bryant replied. “But like I said, we are given a lot of latitude on what constitutes an issue rising to the level of filing a formal report.”

“Is there anything in this manual that you are aware of that says anything about this purported latitude?” Karp asked.

“Um, no, it’s more of an understanding that reporting every contact would be a paperwork nightmare. We get dozens if not hundreds of complaints every year.”

“Did you file a report after meeting with the defendant?”

“Uh, not yet.”

“Not yet?”

“Well, I’m running a bit behind with my paperwork.”

“A bit behind reporting contact with union representatives involved in a murder case?”

Bryant took off his glasses and wiped them with a shirtsleeve before putting them back on. “I know it seems odd,” he said. “But I find I need to do things in the order in which—”

“Mr. Bryant, who is your direct supervisor?” Karp interrupted.

“Uh, that would be Bill Clark.”

“Did you ever say or write anything to Bill Clark regarding any of these contacts or the allegations?”

“Well, uh, now that you mention it, I think I did say something to him at one of our meetings.”

“And what was his reaction?”

“That I should continue to monitor the situation.”

“Really?” Karp said and turned to the back of courtroom, where Guma had reappeared. He nodded and Guma opened the door to let another man enter.

Bryant, as well as everyone else in the courtroom, turned to look and his eyes grew suddenly wide. “Mr. Bryant, do you recognize the man standing in the aisle at the back of this room?”

The witness’s hands were shaking as he reached for a cup of water and knocked it over. “I’m sorry, I—”

As the witness tried to recover, Karp turned to face the defense table as he demanded, “Answer the question, Mr. Bryant. Do you recognize the man standing in the back of the courtroom?”

As if afraid to look, Bryant kept his eyes on his cup of water as he nodded.

“I’m afraid a nod won’t do, Mr. Bryant,” Karp said.

“Yes, he’s my supervisor, Mr. Clark,” Bryant squeaked.

“I’m going to ask you again, Mr. Bryant, if anything was said to Mr. Clark regarding your contact with Mr. Carlotta or Mr. Vitteli?”

“I . . . uh . . . I don’t remember. I might have meant to but—”

“And is it true that you are given a ‘lot of latitude’ on reporting this sort of contact?”

“I may have misspoken about that.”

“Is it true that the first time you had any contact with the defendant
was when he contacted you in June after the trial of Alexei Bebnev and Frank DiMarzo?”

Mopping now at this forehead, Bryant looked up at the ceiling, then at the defense table, and finally back to Karp. He shrugged his shoulders but still didn’t say anything.

“Mr. Bryant, answer my question.”

“I can’t,” Bryant replied.

“Why not?”

“Because I’m going to . . . uh . . . plead the Fifth and . . . uh . . . that’s about what I can say about that,” Bryant replied. His head dropped and he sat staring at his feet, shaking his head back and forth.

With a wry smile on his face, Karp continued to look at Vitteli as he said to the judge, “I ask that the witness’s entire testimony be stricken and that he be remanded pending further official action.”
One last act before the final curtain,
he thought.
Vitteli has no choice but to take the stand.

G
LANCING OVER HIS SHOULDER AT
where Kowalski and Vitteli argued quietly but vehemently, Karp knew that the curtain was rising and the last act was about to begin. The scorned, beleaguered villain, backed into a corner of his own making, believed his only option was to try to fight his way out by taking the stand in his own defense.