celona

John Celona was billed as the star witness, a member of the Rhode Island Senate leadership who had come in from the cold and spilled the corrupt secrets of his onetime coterie on Smith Hill.

When the former senator from North Providence was sentenced to 2½ years in federal prison early last year for selling his office, a federal prosecutor told the judge that Celona’s cooperation had helped spawn active investigations of seven public officials and seven companies.

Some of the names that emerged from the State House influence-peddling probe, dubbed Operation Dollar Bill, were among the biggest in the Senate: Former Senate President William V. Irons. Current Senate President Joseph Montalbano. Senate Finance Chairman Stephen D. Alves.

But the stunningly swift acquittals Friday of two former CVS executives accused of bribing Celona illustrates how quickly Celona’s star has fallen, again –– first as a politician, now as a government witness.

Before the case against John R. “Jack” Kramer and Carlos Ortiz even reached the jury, U.S. Attorney Robert Clark Corrente –– the man in charge of Operation Dollar Bill –– had to make an extraordinary court appearance to refute accusations that his prosecutors had knowingly elicited false testimony from the bumbling and contradictory Celona.

Though prosecutors and FBI agents had met with Celona 25 times since he began cooperating three years ago, Corrente told the judge that “we couldn’t be sure until it came out of his mouth what exactly he was going to say at trial. He had taken multiple different sides, and it was impossible for anyone to know exactly what he was going to say.”

After the verdict, juror Anthony San Giovanni said that Celona “just wasn’t credible.”

“I think the government would have been better off not putting him on the stand if they wanted to get something proven,” said San Giovanni.

Corrente said after the verdict that prosecutors will reassess Celona’s use in the future, given his credibility problems. But he vowed that Operation Dollar Bill will continue.

“This [verdict] means nothing in terms of the various investigations we have under way,” said Corrente. “We’ll evaluate each one on its merits. Anyone who thinks that it’s over because of one ‘not-guilty’ verdict is mistaken. We’re not going away.”

Corrente declined to comment on specific investigations, or a possible timetable.

IRONICALLY, part of Celona’s CVS trial testimony that undermined the government’s case raises questions about another ex-lawmaker with ties to the drugstore chain.

Questioned by Kramer’s lawyer about why he skipped a committee vote on a pharmacy-choice bill, Celona said it was not anyone at CVS, but Senator Irons, then the committee chairman, who told him to “take a walk” on the bill. Celona also testified that when he became the committee chairman, and Irons moved up to Senate president, he followed Irons’ instructions not to give a hearing to pharmacy-choice bills, which CVS opposed because passage might cost the drugstore chain millions of dollars in sales.

The legislation died in his committee year after year.

Irons is a friend of CVS chief executive Tom Ryan and has said that he asked Ryan whether he could receive commissions on a Blue Cross health-insurance policy for CVS employees. The Blue Cross official who handled the policy has said that Irons was not involved in negotiating it, but showed up afterward to collect his commissions, more than $400,000, from Blue Cross.

Irons’ lawyer has said that Irons, an insurance broker, earned the commissions by servicing the account. His lawyer could not be reached for comment regarding Celona’s testimony in the CVS trial.

In another facet of Operation Dollar Bill, another political figure, former House Majority Leader Gerard M. Martineau, was sentenced earlier this year to three years and one month in prison for selling his office to Blue Cross and CVS for paper and plastic bag contracts.

The government also secured a unique agreement with Blue Cross last December in which Rhode Island’s largest health insurer avoided criminal charges by agreeing to pay $20 million to promote affordable health care and by taking responsibility for corrupting public officials.

Corrente dismissed assertions by defense lawyers during the CVS trial that Celona should be prosecuted for perjury. Although that is “obviously an issue we have to look at,” he said that a variety of appellate rulings have held that inconsistent statements alone do not constitute perjury.

“He’s so inconsistent, at so many different points in time, that to equate that with perjury would be silly,” said Corrente.

Lawyers for Kramer and Ortiz took a different view during the trial, accusing prosecutors of misconduct for eliciting false testimony from Celona and failing to disclose all of his inconsistent statements, as required. Chief U.S. District Judge Mary M. Lisi did not grant a mistrial, as the defense wanted, but did say that the government was wrong not to have turned over the information and that the failure had caused “some prejudice” to Kramer and Ortiz.

Will prosecutors put Celona on the stand again? And can they prosecute more corruption cases in Operation Dollar Bill without him?

“Obviously, we have to look at all the additional pieces of the investigations, and his role,” said Corrente. “In some investigations, he’s not central.”

But there is one case where Celona is central –– the case against former Roger Williams Medical Center executives Robert A. Urciuoli and Frances P. Driscoll. Early this year, a federal appeals court overturned their 2006 convictions at a trial in which Celona testified, ruling that the trial judge had improperly instructed the jury on one aspect of the case.

The retrial is set for later this year –– unless the outcome of the CVS trial alters the government’s plans. Corrente says that prosecutors will reevaluate that case as well.

Urciuoli’s lawyer, Michael Connolly, was in the courtroom for part of Celona’s testimony in the CVS trial.

“The [CVS] jury rejected the testimony of John Celona, hook, line and sinker,” Connolly said Friday. “The government now has a difficult decision to make –– whether to prosecute others on the strength of his testimony.”

mstanton@projo.com