U.S. ATTORNEY MISFIRES ON BAILEY

Here is an excerpt from a recent editorial in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Four days after former state Treasurer Wendell Bailey was indicted, the U.S. attorney for western Missouri, Stephen Hill, withdrew the indictment. Mr. Hill's enigmatic explanation was that the charges were being dropped "for court procedural reasons only." Stay tuned, he said in effect.

That's no way for a prosecutor to do his job. People have a right to expect Mr. Hill to get it right the first time. After all, he's not playing horseshoes; he's dealing with a man's reputation, his ability to earn a living and his freedom.

Mr. Bailey was accused in a May 12 indictment of two crimes: using state equipment and state employees in his quest for the Republican nomination for governor in 1992 and money laundering, that is, converting campaign money to his own use. Mr. Hill spent two days trying to strike a plea bargain arrangement with Mr. Bailey before the indictment was made public. Mr. Bailey refused and, when the indictment was handed up, entered a not guilty plea. Then on May 16, Mr. Hill asked the court to withdraw the indictment, saying he would be back.

Perhaps he will return with the same charges couched in different language or brought under a different section of the federal code. Perhaps there will be additional charges as well. But that wouldn't excuse Mr. Hill's on-again, off-again approach to law enforcement.

If the indictment was not drawn up properly, people are bound to wonder whether Democrat Hill was a little too eager to charge Republican Bailey. Or perhaps the explanation is more benign; maybe his office needs instruction in the proper preparation of indictments. Or there may be another reason that, when disclosed, will make sense and will restore public confidence in Mr. Hill. We'll see.