- 264 -
3. Mr. Alexander
We have found that Mr. McWade and Mr. Alexander had an
understanding before the trial of the test cases that the
Alexanders' tax liabilities would be reduced in exchange for
Mr. Alexander's informal assistance to Mr. McWade during the
trial. We have also found that Mr. McWade allowed Mr. Alexander
to present misleading testimony to the Court during the trial
of the test cases in response to Mr. Izen's question whether
Mr. Alexander had an agreement with Mr. McWade for the reduction
of his tax liabilities. Although Judge Goffe was aware that Mr.
Alexander was hostile towards Mr. Kersting and that Mr. Alexander
had offered an affidavit to Mr. McWade regarding the Kersting
programs, Judge Goffe, had he been informed of Mr. Alexander's
understanding with Mr. McWade, might have precluded Mr. Alexander
from testifying at the trial of the test cases or at least taken
that understanding into account in weighing Mr. Alexander's
credibility. Consequently, we must consider whether
Mr. Alexander's testimony was material to the outcome in Dixon
II.
Mr. Alexander was called to testify in part to rebut
Mr. Kersting's testimony regarding the First Savings transaction.
Indeed, Mr. Alexander directly contradicted Mr. Kersting as to
whether Federal regulators ever approved Investors Financial as a
holding company for First Savings. While Judge Goffe concluded
that Mr. Kersting was not a credible witness, our review of Dixon
II convinces us that Mr. Kersting's lack of credibility was by
Page: Previous 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011