Feds 'pursuing' Dougherty

Federal prosecutors said in a court filing yesterday that they are "pursuing an ongoing investigation" of electricians-union honcho John Dougherty, who they said is a "subject" of a criminal investigation.

As a result, they said, a federal judge should not grant him immunity to testify in the upcoming trial of electrical contractor Donald "Gus" Dougherty Jr.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Paul Gray said yesterday that granting John Dougherty immunity to testify in the case could jeopardize any future investigation and prosecution of the union leader.

The feds claim that Gus Dougherty made illegal payments to the union leader in connection with the sale of a Jersey Shore condo that authorities allege was for $24,000 less than its fair-market value, and $115,600 worth of free renovations to the union leader's Pennsport home.

It is a crime for a contractor to give anything of value to an officer of a labor union that represents the employer's workers.

Gus Dougherty has pleaded not guilty to the charges and is scheduled to stand trial May 19.

John Dougherty has not been charged in the case, and has denied any wrongdoing.

On Monday, Gus Dougherty's attorney, Eric Sitarchuk, filed court papers asking U.S. District Judge Eduardo C. Robreno to grant the union leader "use immunity" to testify on behalf of his client.

Sitarchuk said that John Dougherty had been subpoenaed to testify but that the union leader's attorney had told him that Dougherty would assert his Fifth Amendment rights not to testify.

The lawyer, Hank Hockeimer, has recommended that John Dougherty not testify in the case as long as he is the subject of a federal criminal investigation.

Hockeimer said that he has been told by prosecutors that John Dougherty is not a "target" of a federal investigation. A target, unlike a subject, is somebody likely to be charged and who prosecutors believe may have committed a crime.

Sitarchuk said that John Dougherty's testimony was "essential" to Gus Dougherty's defense and could help exonerate him.

He said the Doughertys - who are not related - were the only parties to the transactions at issue.

Gray said that Sitarchuk had not shown that the union leader's testimony was "essential" to Gus Dougherty's defense.

He said that the union leader's lending bank could testify as to the fair-market value of the condo, and that John Dougherty had largely declined to discuss the allegation about free renovations to his home when he was interviewed by federal agents in 2006, saying only that he had "supplied" money to Gus Dougherty.

The feds say that Gus Dougherty billed the union leader for the renovations only after he learned that he was under investigation.

Sitarchuk said that the union leader was prepared to testify that he had "fully compensated" Gus Dougherty for the home renovations, but prosecutors said that he had provided no evidence in his court filing to conclude that.

Gray said that the U.S. Supreme Court has held that "no court has authority to immunize a witness."

The prosecutor said that a 1980 Third Circuit decision that permitted judicial immunity - and which Sitarchuk cited - applied only in limited circumstances, such as prosecutorial misconduct.

Gray said that Sitarchuk had not shown that the feds were acting "inappropriately" to justify an "extraordinary" grant of immunity to "a witness who remains under criminal investigation."