DRUG AGENCY SUSPENDS INFORMANT KNOWN TO LIE IN COURT

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration has suspended its highest-paid
undercover informant following a Post-Dispatch investigation disclosing
that he lied in court dozens of times while testifying for the government.

The suspension came last week after Attorney General Janet Reno expressed
concern that federal drug agents were continuing to use the informant,
Andrew Chambers.

Chambers, 42, grew up in University City. New government records show that
the DEA has paid him at least $2.2 million - $600,000 more than the agency
acknowledged a few weeks ago.

A four-month investigation by the Post-Dispatch found that DEA agents
across the country still were hiring Chambers despite three U.S. appellate
court opinions calling him a liar, and warnings by some federal prosecutors
that he was untrustworthy.

"They know how bad he is," defense attorney David Z. Chesnoff of Las Vegas
said of the DEA's agents. "He's just the tip of the iceberg of abuse by
informants of the federal government."

Chesnoff was referring to hundreds of other professional
informants-for-hire believed to be in use by the DEA, the FBI, the IRS, the
Secret Service and other government agencies.

Like other professional informants, Chambers testifies for money - often
paid in cash. His total pay from all government sources - counting state
and local investigations - over 16 years is estimated to be as much as $4
million.

The amount of his government pay depends upon whom he helps put away, the
length of their prison sentences and the quantity of drugs involved.
Critics say these are powerful incentives for informants to exaggerate - or
just plain lie - in court.

Chambers has many friends at the DEA, and he has survived attacks before on
his credibility.

In April 1998, H. Dean Steward, an assistant federal public defender in
California, filed a complaint with the DEA's Office of Professional
Responsibility - the agency's internal affairs unit.

Steward found records showing that the DEA had used Chambers in more than
300 investigations. "Chambers has lied under oath virtually every time he
has been put on the witness stand," Steward wrote. "I can document the lies
. . .

"These lies are also significant and substantial. He lies about his
criminal history, his educational background, his aliases, where he is
from, and just about every personal detail you could imagine."

Steward said the DEA's continued use of Chambers was a breach of
professional conduct: "Chambers' file in Washington must be two feet thick
with instance after instance of false statement, lies, arrests, and
convictions."

However thick Chambers' file at the DEA's headquarters, its agents weren't
sharing that information with federal prosecutors in the field. So they
could not provide it, as required by the rules of evidence discovery, with
defense lawyers who might have used it to challenge Chamber's credibility
in front of juries.

Months after Steward's complaint, the DEA says it started restricting the
use of Chambers. Beginning last September, anti-drug agents were not
allowed to use him without revealing his full background to the prosecutor.
Both the prosecutor and the agents' supervisor had to consent to any use of
Chambers.

Critics who learned of the DEA's actions months later thought the
restrictions should put Chambers out of business; what federal prosecutor
would consent to using an admitted perjurer, they thought.

They were wrong. On Jan. 16, the Post-Dispatch reported that the DEA again
was using Chambers, this time in a drug case in Florida. Since then, he has
surfaced in a second Florida case.

In a statement last week, the Justice Department said:

"Following the recent St. Louis Post-Dispatch article, DEA reopened its
review of the use of the informant. Until that new review is complete, DEA
has suspended its use of this informant."

DEA spokesman Mike McManus said the agency's latest investigation into
Chambers would be conducted by officials "at the highest levels." He said
it wasn't known yet whether the new investigation would be conducted by
officials in the Office of Professional Responsibility - who conducted the
previous investigation - or by someone else. DEA Administrator Donnie R.
Marshall will name the investigators.

McManus said the investigation would examine every allegation against
Chambers - for perjury or anything else that might be uncovered.

One of Reno's spokesmen said he expected investigators to interview DEA
agents and federal prosecutors, as well as examine transcripts of trials in
which Chambers testified.

During his career, Chambers has testified in at least a half-dozen St.
Louis area drug cases.

Three federal prosecutors here have refused to allow Chambers to testify.
One called Chambers a "flimflam man," and warned of a lack of institutional
controls over him. Matt LeMieux, executive director of the American Civil
Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri, said the DEA has a constitutional
responsibility to not use informants known to have credibility problems.

LeMieux called for an independent agency to investigate the DEA.

He also noted the basic right of every American to a fair trial. "And the
trial can't be fair when people who testify lie on the stand," he said.

LeMieux said the controversy surrounding Chambers is part of a bigger
picture. "And that is: how many rights are we willing to forfeit in the
name of this so-called war on drugs?"