Knappster: Galardi names judges, prosecutors, officers who sought cash, favors

By George Knapp

It's probably hard for people to work up much sympathy for Mike Galardi. After all, Galardi has been made fabulously wealthy by the topless clubs he operated in Las Vegas and San Diego. He owns fancy homes, drives expensive cars, dates flashy women and hobnobs with celebrities and bigshots, all made possible by the hordes of horny guys who frequent his pleasure palaces.

But if you were to read Galardi's account of the things he felt he had to do to stay in business here, you might feel a twinge of guilt. Knappster has recently seen documents based on Galardi's statements to federal authorities, statements made during extensive debriefing sessions held last year in Las Vegas and San Diego. Basically, the tale he tells is that of a businessman who was victimized by politicians, judges, bureaucrats and law enforcement officials, nearly all of whom had their hands out (or in some cases, other appendages.)

Readers already know the names of some of the officials who allegedly extorted money from Galardi. The long list of additional names offered up by Galardi to the feds would make you sick to your stomach. Whether these names are ever made public is up to federal officials. If they want to investigate all the names and actions alleged by Galardi, they could probably stay busy for the next 10 years.

Galardi has said that he's been making payoffs to greedy politicians for many years, almost since the beginning of his entry into the topless business. The conversations he related to the FBI make it seem as if Las Vegas public officials, from the most powerful elected positions down to the most obscure bureaucrats, all expected to be paid--in cash, through campaign contributions or with sexual favors from the nubile dancers Galardi employed.

Take judges, for example. Galardi said he developed a basic format for funneling money to judges. His contributions most often came in $10,000 increments, half by check and half in cash. Wads of cash were often delivered to the judges by private attorneys and by deputy prosecutors, all of whom were anxious to curry favor with the jurists who might someday decide their cases. Galardi said he did it as a defensive measure. He figured the day would come when his clubs might be subjected to "a dram shop" lawsuit or other legal action that might put him out of business. He gave the FBI the names of six local judges who took money or other favors from him, including the name of one who was so anxious to get the cash that he showed up at Jaguars only minutes after calling Galardi to inquire about a payoff. Another judge had a party at a local hotel, and Galardi sent over half a dozen strippers as entertainment. Two of the young ladies had sex with the judge. Galardi says he knows this because both of the women and the judge later told him about it.

What did he get in return? He told the FBI about two legal decisions that went in his favor. One decision by a local judge helped not only Galardi's clubs but the topless industry in general by limiting the clubs' legal liability. A second case involved a Galardi employee who was busted for DUI and had the charge reduced to almost nothing. Galardi estimates that he funneled about $200,000 to local judges over the last few years and he doesn't think much of it was ever declared on campaign contribution reports.

Galardi also told the feds that his clubs frequently hosted all sorts of law enforcement officials. He gave up the name of 11 Metro officers, but it appears most of them did nothing more serious than accept half-price drinks or free lap dances. He also named six FBI agents who allegedly accepted comps or favors, but it appears that only one of those agents was really involved with Galardi. (That agent apparently became a close friend to Galardi and allegedly sampled a few of his dancers. The FBI won't comment for the record, but it's believed that Pettit was disciplined and was transferred to Nigeria.) In general, the FBI deserves a lot of credit for proceeding with its investigation even after it looked like Galardi would spill the beans on its own agents.

Galardi claims he also got to know a lot of prosecutors. He estimates more than 20 deputy district attorneys frequented his clubs and received special favors. He would usually peel off $500 or $1,000, he said, so the prosecutors could enjoy drinks and lap dances. Most of them came in at the invitation of two prosecutors who were regulars at the clubs. One of those took so many of the dancers to his home that Galardi referred to it as "the orgy house."

The serious money, though, went to elected officials. Hundreds of thousands of dollars went to elected officials so that local government would do Galardi's bidding. When you hear his story, though, it sounds like a stickup. He told the FBI about a relentless parade of threats aimed at his clubs by officials. Every few weeks, he said, some of these folks would show up with a new potential threat to the topless industry and would expect to be paid to make it go away. If it wasn't extortion, it sure as hell sounds close. Galardi seems to have a pretty good memory when it comes to recalling conversations. Add to that the fact that many of his conversations with elected officials were secretly taped by the FBI. When the tapes and testimony are finally made public, the public is going to feel like retching.

Is Galardi believable? Federal agents and prosecutors seem to think so. Their confidence is bolstered by the results of four separate polygraph exams administered by a man who was, for many years, the FBI's own polygraph expert. Galardi passed all four of the exams, and while the questions did not focus on all aspects of his potential testimony, the results gave the feds confidence that their future star witness is generally telling the truth.

Mike Galardi is certainly no angel. He did a lot of things that he had to know were wrong. But if his story pans out, it sure looks like he was a victim of widespread greed and corruption that might just permeate our government to an unbelievable level.

Names and faces

District Attorney Dave Roger showed once again last week that he is a standup guy. After Sandy Murphy and Rick Tabish were acquitted of murdering Ted Binion, a disappointed Roger did not duck the media and did not whine about the verdict. His deputies Christopher Lalli and Robert Daskas have nothing to be ashamed of. They worked hard, fought a clean fight, but didn't get the verdict they wanted. The public should be happy it has quality people like these three in those jobs. ... The family feud involving Nevada Beverage owner Pat Clark Jr. and his three sisters is heating up. By the time this column is printed, the fight for the control of Nevada Beverage will likely have entered a new stage. I wonder if the media will hear from the granddaughter of the late Pat Clark Sr. about how and why she was cut out of her family's estate. ... Famed author Nick Pileggi, whose Casino was made into a major Hollywood movie, has a new Las Vegas project in the works. We'll tell you about it down the line. ... Las Vegas City Councilman Michael Mack has been having frank discussions with close associates about his political future. He's not likely to seek re-election.

Augustine update

Those Nevada lawmakers who think the impeachment trial for Controller Kathy Augustine can be completed in a mere two weeks are living in dreamland--and I don't mean Area 51. Legislative staffers conducted a study of similar impeachment trials from all over the country. The shortest trial they found took a full six weeks.

I suppose it's possible that lawmakers will try to impose limits on Augustine's trial, but it's a tricky spot for them. They're already hinting that they may not allow Augustine's laywers to present the defense they want. But if they also get too strict with the time allotted for the defense, they run the risk of making this look like a compete railroad job. If they're going to put Augustine, themselves and Nevada taxpayers through this unfortunate episode, the least they can do is make certain the accused gets due process. If they don't, they invite a lengthy court battle that could cost the public even more money.