Rhetoric getting heated in theft case involving college official
It must have seemed so simple at the time: Prosecute theft charges against College of Southern Nevada associate vice president for facilities management William "Bob" Gilbert.
Gilbert and three other men stand accused of stealing materials and equipment and working on college time to build Gilbert's home in lower Kyle Canyon. Gilbert is charged with 13 felony theft counts and four counts of misconduct by a public officer. The state attorney general's office is also attempting to seize Gilbert's million-dollar home in a civil forfeiture action.
It's the kind of case that makes newspaper readers seethe and can build political careers. After all, no one likes a crooked public servant and everyone loves the sheriff who cleans up the town.
But is this case fraying at the edges and threatening to come apart like a cardboard shanty?
Absolutely, Gilbert's defense team says.
Absolutely not, counters Chief Deputy Attorney General Conrad Hafen, who calls it "one of the most straightforward cases I've ever prosecuted here."
You wouldn't think it would be difficult to determine whether Gilbert stole materials during the construction of his home. Problem is, Gilbert had approval from two college presidents to work out of his expansive home shop, and his defense is producing witnesses who appear to counter many of the theft claims.
Hafen asserts Gilbert was responsible for the theft of "hundreds of thousands of dollars" in materials and equipment to build his home, but civil attorney Brent Bryson argues only a few thousand dollars is in question -- and all of that is easily explained. Veteran defense lawyer John Momot is handling Gilbert's criminal case.
"I have a problem with overzealous prosecutors and investigators and people that prosecute for their own personal agenda," Bryson says.
He calls the building supplies in question "scrap material or material that had been surplussed and given away." Hafen calls it expensive material easily traced to college projects.
But there's a problem with the portrait of Gilbert as a theft kingpin. He has witnesses stepping forward to say the ex-Marine was bulldog tough, made some vindictive enemies, and brought in projects on time and often under budget.
Speaking of tough, the case is being prosecuted by the relentless Hafen and was investigated by Anthony Ruggiero. Both are no strangers to controversy.
Hafen was the lead prosecutor of Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki in a case that resulted in the dismissal of misconduct charges. Ruggiero was a state investigator who took part in an inquiry into complaints against the Tire Works auto shops. That case resulted in an embarrassing stipulated withdrawal of the complaint with the attorney general's office admitting its investigation was lacking.
Defense attorneys have assailed Ruggiero's grand jury testimony as false. While such allegations aren't surprising, they give you an idea of how heated the rhetoric is getting.
"Let's put it this way, the prosecutor took this case to the grand jury," Momot says. "A lot of witnesses have testified, and when you start digging deeper into the case you start uncovering a lot of materials that are going to disprove the counts in this indictment."
Bryson adds, "Something's going on here because it certainly doesn't warrant the kind of conduct the state is engaging in."
Hafen replies, "The evidence is really straightforward. The allegation is he was stealing construction equipment and material from the college to build his house. The fact they're making these allegations is nothing new. That's typical defense attorney rhetoric."
What isn't typical is the attempt to seize Gilbert's house in a forfeiture action. Even if legally justifiable, it seems extreme in a theft case.
If the allegations one day collapse like a house of cardboard, the case could bury more than one promising career.
John L. Smith's column appears Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. E-mail him at Smith@reviewjournal.com or call (702) 383-0295. He also blogs at lvrj.com/blogs/smith.
