Prosecutors in the federal bribery case of former Honolulu prosecutor Keith Kaneshiro hammered home their argument on Tuesday that Honolulu businessman Dennis Mitsunaga and his colleagues wanted revenge on a former employee of Mitsunaga’s architecture firm and bribed Kaneshiro to pursue phony theft charges against her. 

But attorneys for three of the defendants — Mitsunaga, Kaneshiro and Mitsunaga & Associates chief operating officer Aaron Fujii — said during their closing arguments that the government hasn’t presented enough evidence to prove bribery occurred.

None of the contributions Mitsunaga & Associates employees made to Kaneshiro’s campaign were illegal, they said, and the charges against the former employee, Laurel Mau, were brought in good faith. 

After two months of trial and dozens of witnesses, jurors will have to decide beyond a reasonable doubt whether all six defendants — Mitsunaga, Kaneshrio and Fujii as well as Mitsunaga & Associates secretary Terri Otani, president Chad McDonald and attorney Sheri Tanaka — are guilty of conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy against the rights of citizens. They have all pleaded not guilty. 

Central to the jurors’ decision will be whether they believe the donations Mitsunaga and his employees funneled to Kaneshiro’s campaigns were bribes in disguise, as prosecutors say, or legal campaign contributions by politically active constituents, as the defense argues.

They will also have to decide whether they believe the government’s narrative that employees of Mitsunaga & Associates wanted revenge on an innocent Mau, or the defense’s version — that Mau indeed stole time and resources from the company, and Mitsunaga & Associates was the victim.

‘Bundle Of Bribes’

Using a slideshow with graphics, Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph Orabona reminded the jury of the timeline of events beginning with Mau’s firing in November 2011 and ending in June 2017 with a judge throwing out the theft charges Kaneshiro’s office brought against her. 

Pulling up a a slide with small photos of Mitsunaga and Kaneshiro on either side of a large calculator displaying the sum $13,250, Orabona said it illustrated the “first bundle of bribes” sent to Kaneshiro’s campaign on Oct. 25, 2012.

This was Mitsunaga’s attempt to make a “show of force” and persuade Kaneshiro to pursue theft charges against Mau, whom Mitsunaga viewed as disloyal, he said. Mau was fired from Mitsunaga & Associates in 2011 and sued the company in August 2012. 

A pattern of communication between Mitsunaga & Associates employees and members of Kaneshiro’s office, including a one-minute eight-second phone call between Kaneshiro and Mitsunaga shortly after the first batch of donations was made, are evidence of a conspiracy, Orabona said. 

Mitsunaga even orchestrated a $10,000 batch of donations to Kaneshiro shortly after the then-prosecutor had been reelected, he said.

Why would someone donate to the campaign of a recently elected official? Orabona asked the jury.

“Because it’s a bribe, that’s what it is,” he said. 

But defense attorneys said their clients donated because they liked and supported Kaneshiro, and the lunches, emails and phone calls between Mitsunaga and his associates and Kaneshiro’s office don’t prove they were discussing a bribery conspiracy. 

Kaneshiro’s attorney, Birney Bervar, said the phone call Kaneshiro placed to Mitsunaga was simply a thank you. 

“How much of a bribery scheme can you hatch in one minute and eight seconds?” he said. 

He described his client as a 25-year public servant who won reelection against Kevin Takata in 2012 by a wide margin. 

“Keith Kaneshiro didn’t need the money or the votes,” he said. 

Mitsunaga’s attorney, Nina Marino, told jurors her client donated nearly half a million dollars between 2010 and 2020 to a variety of candidates he thought would be good for the city and the state. She called campaign donations a “stupid way to pay a bribe.”

“They’re recorded and they are very public,” she said. “The MAI (Mitsunaga & Associates) people have a long history of making political contributions. There is nothing unusal about the donations they made to the Kaneshiro campaign.” 

Innocent Ex-Employee Or Thief?

The defense tried to refute the government’s argument that Mau was an innocent former employee targeted with a meritless prosecution as revenge for filing a lawsuit against Mitsunaga & Associates. 

Marino said Mitsunaga and others at the company felt “deeply victimized” by Mau, whom they accused of working dozens of side jobs on company time using the company name before she was fired in 2011. 

Bervar said probable cause existed to charge Mau with four counts of theft in 2015. Jacob Delaplane, a former deputy prosecutor to whom Kaneshiro assigned Mau’s case, testified he was never pressured to pursue the case and did so in good faith.

The Mau case may have gotten special attention, Bervar said, not because of bribes, but because of a growing friendship between Tanaka in Mitsunaga’s office and Carol Nakamura, Kaneshiro’s executive assistant. 

“Does friendship get you access? Darn right,” he said. 

Orabona said Mau never stole from Mitsunaga & Associates, but whether or not she did is beside the point. Any violation of company policy should have been handled as a personnel matter, not a criminal one, he said. 

Kaneshiro was willing to pursue the case, though, despite the fact other prosecutors in his office, including Dwight Nadamoto and Christopher Van Marter, had already refused to take it due to lack of evidence.  After Kaneshiro assigned it to Delaplane, all the evidence used to charge Mau came directly from Tanaka, he said. 

When Mau was eventually arrested on Dec. 9, 2014, Otaki, McDonald and Tanaka came to the courtroom to watch her arraignment, he said, pointing to screenshots of the courtroom taken the day Mau was arraigned. 

“They wanted to see the fruits of their spoils,” he said. “The bribe’s been paid, and now it’s time to enjoy what they paid for.” 

Witness Tampering

Orabona and Marino also addressed accusations Mitsunaga tried to tamper with the testimony of a trial witness, an allegation that landed him behind bars on April 19. He has been ordered to remain in custody for the duration of the trial despite health issues.

Orabona reminded jurors Mitsunaga met with a woman named Joanna Kameoka, whom he called his “ninja,” in April outside the courtroom to discuss a message he wanted delivered to his longtime friend and upcoming witness, Rudy Alivado. Mitsunaga wanted Alivado to plead the Fifth Amendment and invoke his right against self-incrimination because he thought Alivado’s testimony would be damaging. 

Orabona said Mitsunaga’s actions show he’s conscious of his role in the bribery case. 

“He knows what he’s done. He’s part of both conspiracies,” Orabona said. “He knows that he’s got to get Rudy not to testify.”

But Marino said her client was just acting like a concerned friend. Alivado had admitted to lying when he testified in the civil case involving Mau, and Mitsunaga feared he would be accused of perjury if he took the stand. 

Though she conceded it was wrong for her client to contact a witness, she told jurors Mitsunaga’s actions didn’t prove he was guilty of a broader conspiracy. 

“Mr. Mitsunaga sent Joanna to Rudy with a message out of friendship, fear and frustration,” she said. “He should not have done that, but the reasons the prosecution argues that he did are just wrong. Thankfully, it’s not up to them to decide, it’s up to you.” 

Trial is scheduled to resume Wednesday with closing arguments from attorneys for the three remaining defendants — Otani, Tanaka and McDonald. The government will then have an opportunity for rebuttal. The jury will begin deliberations after closing arguments.