PANEL UNSEALS ALLEGATIONS AGAINST DAVIS

Can't See Need To Keep Felon's Claims Secret

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday told a Sacramento federal
judge to unseal a convicted felon's allegations that a high-ranking
politician -- now known to be Gov. Gray Davis -- engaged in public corruption.

Ruling on the case for the second time, the panel rejected Senior U.S.
District Judge Lawrence Karlton's claim that redacting Davis' name was
necessary to protect his reputation and Nathanson's safety.

While running for lieutenant governor, according to former Coastal
Commissioner Mark Nathanson, Davis sought Nathanson's help in winning
favors for developers whom Davis saw as potential campaign contributors.
Nathanson was convicted in 1993 of soliciting bribes in exchange for
favorable treatment by the commission.

Nathanson made the allegations through two of his lawyers to the Sacramento
U.S. attorney in hopes of gaining leniency. The letters were sealed by
Karlton to protect the reputations of a then-unnamed "high public official"
and a still-unnamed Southern California real estate developer whom
Nathanson also accused. Karlton found Nathanson not to be credible.

But a unanimous three-judge panel ruled that reputation is no reason to
seal an otherwise public document.

"The high public official has no privacy interest in allegations, baseless
though they may be, that touch on his conduct in public office or in his
campaign for public office," 9th Circuit Judge John Noonan wrote.

The letters were sent in 1993 and 1994, one prior to Nathanson's sentencing
to five years in prison and the other a year later. Nathanson's plea
agreement stated the government could move to reduce Nathanson's sentence
if he proved cooperative.

In 1996 the government got Nathanson's sentence reduced one year, in part
for "assistance he had provided the government." Prosecutors said Nathanson
had helped in a civil case in Los Angeles.

In preparing for Nathanson's 1999 probation revocation hearing, a
Sacramento Bee reporter noticed documents were missing from the case file.
The newspaper asked Karlton to unseal them.

Karlton released redacted versions of the letters, which allege specific
instances when Davis sought Nathanson's help on matters before the Coastal
Commission that were of interest to potential campaign contributors.
Nathanson also alleged that the real estate developer agreed to pay him a
"consulting fee to disguise the payment arrangement."

"[Nathanson] also knows a lot about [redacted] generally and can probably
provide you with very good insights into [redacted] personally and who else
might know similar types of things about him," wrote Baker Botts partner
Stephen Braga in the first letter.

A year later, San Francisco solo Jerrold Ladar wrote: "[Redacted] also
wanted a list of people for whom Nathanson had done favors relating to the
Coastal Commission so that he could call those persons. Using Nathanson's
name, [redacted] would try to obtain contributions."

The Sacramento U.S. attorney's office did not comment Monday on In Re
McClatchy Newspapers, 01 C.D.O.S. 10055. During lower court hearings,
however, U.S. attorney John Vincent stated that Nathanson was not a
trustworthy source.

Rex Heinke, a partner at Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld who represented
the newspaper, said his client intends to investigate the allegations.

"Since the government has decided not to look into Mr. Nathanson's
allegations, [The Bee] has decided to," Heinke said.

Davis' lawyer, Remcho, Johansen & Purcell's James Harrison, declined to
comment.

Davis isn't named in the opinion, but the Sacramento Bee published a story
nearly two years ago saying the redacted references were to Davis, and
named him in court papers.

The unnamed developer is represented by an attorney identified in court
papers only as "Doe counsel."