Brooks' defense says his talks with vet misinterpreted

Defense attorneys for David Brooks say federal prosecutors are misinterpreting the former DHB chief's conversations with a veterinarian in which the government says the former body-armor manufacturer talked about obtaining a drug to erase the memory of the key witness against him and other possibly illegal activities.

The government wants Dr. Seth Fishman of Florida to testify in U.S. District Court in Central Islip about Brooks' request for the memory-eliminating drug, that Brooks told Fishman he secretly controlled a Tennessee company Brooks' then-wife was supposed to head, and that Brooks had the computer of the chief government witness, Dawn Schlegel.

Federal prosecutors have said the Tennessee company was secretly used by Brooks to funnel millions of dollars to his horse-racing business, and that an e-mail Brooks tried to introduce to discredit Schlegel -- the former chief financial officer of his DHB Industries -- was a forgery. When Brooks refused to reveal the e-mail's origin, Judge Joanna Seybert held him in contempt of court.

But Brooks' attorneys have argued that Fishman should not be permitted to testify for the government because he had a type of legal relationship with Brooks, known as a Kovel agreement, that bars revealing conversations about legal issues, similar to those covered by the attorney-client privilege. Brooks is on trial for allegedly looting his former Westbury company of millions of dollars.

Brooks' lead attorney, Kenneth Ravenell, said that Brooks talked about the memory drug because he was concerned that Schlegel would lie about him in her testimony, and that he also was motivated, perhaps, by frustration.

Ravenell quoted from a government transcript of Fishman's recollection that had Brooks saying, "Can you have a pill available to erase her memory, because I'm concerned she's such a liar, she will lie on me."

Ravenell did not deny Brooks made the statements to Fishman.

But federal prosecutor Christopher Caffarone argued that even if a Kovel agreement existed, it was apparently concocted after the relevant conversations occurred. He also scoffed at the idea that Brooks' statements to Fishman involved the type of legal issues that a client would ask a veterinarian about.

Judge Seybert is expected to rule soon on whether to allow Fishman to testify or hold a hearing on the issue.