What each side in the Geddings trial wants jurors to focus on

Jurors will begin deliberating this morning in the federal fraud trial of former state lottery commissioner Kevin L. Geddings. In closing arguments Wednesday, lawyers pointed jurors to key points they want them to keep in mind:

PROSECUTION ARGUMENTS

GEDDINGS DID NOT DISCLOSE. After winning a seat on the commission, Geddings repeatedly failed to disclose payments he had received from a lottery company, Scientific Games, that was seeking lottery contracts. Geddings deliberately hid the information from state ethics watchdogs, the lottery's chairman, a senior adviser to Gov. Mike Easley and the news media.

GEDDINGS HID TIES. When questions surfaced about possible ties between Geddings and Scientific Games, Geddings sent an e-mail message to his assistant: "Pls never acknowledge by phone that sci games is a client"

SCIENTIFIC GAMES HELPED WITH APPOINTMENT. Geddings was in contact with two Scientific Games employees on the dates his appointment was solidified, including his longtime friend and company vice president, Alan Middleton. Middleton called him and gave him a heads up on Sept. 21, 2005, then Meredith Norris, an aide to House Speaker Jim Black and a lobbyist for Scientific Games, e-mailed him. The next day, Geddings was appointed and sent a thank-you message to Norris.

GEDDINGS KNEW THE RAMIFICATIONS OF DISCLOSURE. On Oct. 27, 2005, Geddings was told by two Scientific Games executives that the company was set to disclose payments it had made to him in 2005. Geddings argued with them not to do it; he said that he would be finished as a commissioner and that if he had revealed the information, he would have not secured his seat on the lottery board.

GEDDINGS WASN'T CREDIBLE. Geddings was caught in what prosecutors called "falsehoods" throughout the trial. Prosecutors showed, for example, how Geddings publicly said he did not want commissioners meeting one-on-one with lottery vendors, but then was talking regularly with Middleton of Scientific Games.

GEDDINGS' ARGUMENTS

GEDDINGS REMOVED HIMSELF. Geddings recused himself on the commission from decisions involving Scientific Games and spoke openly about his ties to Middleton, which included a past business relationship. Geddings said he did not think he needed to reveal more information about his past work with the company since he had taken himself out of vendor decisions.

THERE WAS NO SCHEME. There was no five-year scheme by Geddings to win a spot on the commission to then try to steer business to Scientific Games, which is how the defense portrayed the government's indictment.

Lawyer Thomas Manning said the lottery was not "even a twinkle in anybody's eye or anybody's daddy's eye" five years ago.

GEDDINGS WASN'T IN THE LOOP. E-mail traffic shows that Geddings was not in concert with Norris and Middleton about obtaining the seat -- at least not until very late in the process. Again, he argued, it's evidence of his appointment being an "accident" made at the last minute and not a devious effort to benefit Scientific Games.

SCIENTIFIC GAMES CUT HIM LOOSE. After Geddings won the appointment, Scientific Games immediately took steps to sever any contractual or other business relationship.

GEDDINGS FILLED OUT DISCLOSURE FORMS PROPERLY. Geddings tried to follow the instructions as best he could when disclosing his past ties -- and took a literal reading of the verb tense in each question. Since his work for Scientific Games was in the past, Geddings did not disclose it.

THE CHARGES

Geddings is charged with depriving the public of his "honest services," which prosecutors say includes an obligation to conduct his efforts to secure the lottery appointment "openly and free from fraud and dishonesty."