Honolulu bribery trial won’t be postponed despite an investigation into a threat against a US judge
HONOLULU– An upcoming bribery trial against Honolulu’s former chief prosecutor will not be postponed despite an ongoing investigation into allegations that a defendant threatened the judge who presided over the case, prompting his unexpected dismissal last month.
The new judge ruled on Wednesday that there will be only one trial for all six suspects, and that jury selection will continue to take place on March 12.
U.S. District Judge J. Michael Seabright had presided over the case since a grand jury in 2022 indicted former Honolulu prosecutor Keith Kaneshiro and five others, alleging that employees of an engineering and architecture firm bribed Kaneshiro with campaign donations in exchange for his prosecution of a former company employee.
They have pleaded not guilty. The indictment alleges that Mitsunaga & Associates employees and an attorney contributed more than $45,000 to Kaneshiro’s re-election campaigns between October 2012 and October 2016.
The former employee targeted for prosecution had been a project architect at Mitsunaga & Associates for 15 years when she was fired without explanation on the same day she disagreed with the CEO’s claims against her, according to court documents.
Kaneshiro’s office prosecuted the architect, identified in court documents only as LJM, but a judge dismissed the case in 2017 for lack of probable cause.
Without explanation, Seabright bailed himself out of the case last month. All other federal judges in Hawaii were bailed out, and Senior U.S. District Judge Timothy Burgess in Alaska stepped in to take over the case.
According to Burgess’ ruling, on Jan. 24, when Seabright announced his denial, the government filed a sealed notice that one of the defendants was under investigation for allegations of threatening the safety of the previous judge and a special prosecutor in the case .
One of the defendants, Sheri Tanaka, the firm’s attorney, later asked for a delay and for a separate trial.
One of her lawyers, Mark Mermelstein, argued that her defense team has not been able to adequately prepare for the trial since her devices were seized as part of the investigation into the alleged threats. Mermelstein also argued that she cannot receive a fair trial because of a local television news report describing the investigation as a murder-for-hire plot.
The co-defendants also wanted Tanaka to be separated from the case, but they objected to a postponement of the trial date.
No new charges have been filed against Tanaka. A California magistrate judge ruled last week that the conditions allowing her to remain out on bail in the bribery case will remain unchanged, despite a petition from a probation officer stating that Tanaka “may pose a danger to another person or to the community.”
Mermelstein tried to keep Friday’s bail hearing closed to the public, but Brian Black, an attorney with the Public First Law Center, objected. The Associated Press, along with other members of the media, also objected. U.S. Magistrate Judge Nathanael Cousins allowed the hearing to proceed in open court, giving Mermelstein the opportunity to summarize what a witness might have said behind closed doors about whether Tanaka is a danger.
Tanaka was extorted by those who threatened her and her family, Mermelstein said in court.
“She believed bad people were coming after her and her family, and paid money to the blackmailers to stop them,” Mermelstein said in a written statement after the hearing. “It appears that an informant told the government that this payment was for something completely different.”
Tanaka wants Seabright “to know that she does not and will never attempt to harm him, any other judicial officer or anyone else,” the statement said.