Petitioners:

FLEET RUSSELL WHITE, JR. AND
PRISCILLA BROWN WHITE

v.

RESPONDENT:

DAVID J. THOMAS, as District Attorney
For the First Judicial District of the State
Of Colorado

Petitioners proceeding pro se:

Names: Fleet Russell White, Jr.
Priscilla Brown White

(Address and phone number redacted)

AFFIDAVIT REQUESTING HEARING PURSUANT TO C.R.S. SECTION 16-5-209 WITH
REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED RULING

For its affidavit pursuant to C.R.S. Section 16-5-209 petitioners state as follows:

1. Petitioners Fleet Russell White, Jr. and Priscilla Brown White are husband and wife and are
residents of Boulder, Colorado.

2) Respondent David. J. Thomas is the duly elected District Attorney for the First Judicial
District of the State of Colorado ( “District Attorney Thomas”).

3) On October 22, 2002 petitioners delivered to District Attorney Thomas a letter and sworn
affidavits alleging that a person or persons had attempted to influence District Attorney
Thomas’ official decisiion regarding felony indictments of Craig Allen Lewis (The People of the
State of Colorado v. Craig Allen Lewis, Jefferson County District Court Case No. 99 CR 3053)
in a manner that violated C.R.S. Section 18-8-306, attempt to influence a public servant, and
possibly other Colorado criminal statutes. Petitioners requested that the matter be investigated
and prosecuted through the appointment of a special prosecutor and be recommended to the
Colorado Attorney General for investigation by a state grand jury. A copy of petitioners letter
dated October 22, 2002 is attached hereto as Exhibit A and is incorporated herein.

4. On or about October 23, 2002 District Attorney Thomas sent petitioners a letter refuting
petitioners allegations and declining to “conduct an investigation or to seek a special
prosecutor” in the matter. A copy of District Attorney Thomas’ letter dated October 23, 2002 is
attached hereto as Exhibit B and is incorporated herein.

5. As of this date, petitioners are unaware of any investigation, prosecution, or any other action
taken by District Attorney Thomas regarding the crimes alleged by petitioners nor have
petitioners been advised by District Attorney Thomas of his intention to take any such actions.

6. Petitioners do not know the dates on which the alleged crimes occurred. Petitioners do,
however, believe that the alleged crimes most likely occurred in the year 2000. Therefore, the
normal three-year statute of limitations for a felony offense such as attempt to influence a
public servant may expire in 2003 (footnote)

7. C.R.S. Section 16-5-209, Judge may require prosecution reads in part:

The judge of a court having jurisdiction of the alleged offense, upon affidavit filed with the
judge alleging commission of a crime and the unjustified refusal of the prosecuting attorney to
prosecute any person for the crime, may require the prosecuting attorney to appear before the
judge and explain the refusal.

This statute “specifically calls for a hearing and, therefore, the introduction of evidence” and
“allows pre-hearing discovery…pursuant to the rules of civil procedure.” Moddy v. Larsen, 802
P. 2s 1169 (Colo. App. 1990). Furthermore, it has been held that for the purposes of a hearing
pursuant to C.R.S. Section 16-5-209:

We conclude that pre-hearing discovery should be allowed here, pursuant to the rules of civil
procedure, for the examination of the following:

1) evidence considered by the prosecutor in making the initial decision not to prosecute,
including police reports;
2) evidence not considered by the prosecutor but still available to him; and
3) evidence of the prosecutor’s motive or lack of good faith or evidence which may reasonably
rebut the prosecutor’s claim of good faith.

To hold that a challenging party must prove that the prosecuting attorney’s failure to pursue a
case results from a cause that is unwarranted or unreasonable, without even limited discovery,
before any explanation by the prosecuting attorney is made, and without the opportunity to
present rebuttal evidence, is to render the General Assembly’s mechanism for prevention of
such abuse an empty shell. Furthermore, such a result is not consonant with sound judicial
administration. See Moody v. Larsen, 802 P.2d 1169, 1173 (Colo. App. 1990).

(Footnote 1) Petitioners believe that at least one of the parties alleged to have committed
crimes is not a resident of Colorado. His absence from the State of Colorado since 2000 may
have thus tolled the time limitations for prosecution pursuant to C.R.S. Section 16-5-401 (2).
8. Pursuant to C.R.S. 16-5-209, petitioners hereby request that the Court order District
Attorney Thomas to appear and explain his refusal.

WHEREFORE, petitioners respectfully request that the Court exercise its jurisdiction under
C.R.S. Section 16-5-209 by:

a) ordering a hearing and directing District Attorney Thomas to appear and fully explain his
refusal to prosecute any person for the crimes alleged by petitioners.
b) After such hearing and upon the Court finding that the conduct of District Attorney Thomas
was arbitrary, capricious and without reasonable excuse, directing him to conduct further
investigation of the matter and prosecutre the case, or in the alternative, appointing a
successor special prosecutor to do so; and
c) Providing such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

Due to the likely expiration of applicable statue of limitations in 2003, petitioners request and
expedited ruling from the Court and the scheduling of a hearing at the earliest possible date.

Respectfully submitted this 7th day of April, 2003

Fleet Russell White, Jr.
Priscilla Brown White

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

I hereby certify that on this 7th day of April 2003 the original of AFFIDAVIT REQUESTING
HEARING PURSUANT TO C.R.S. SECTION 16-5-209 was filed with Jefferson County District
Court and that a true and correct copy thereof was served on the other party by placing it in
the mail in the United States mail, postage pre-paid and addressed as follows:

David J. Thomas
District Attorney
First Judicial District
500 Jefferson County Parkway
Golden, Colorado 80401-6020

Fleet Russell White

Fleet Russell White, Jr. and Priscilla Brown White
(address and phone number redacted)

October 22, 2002

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Subject: The People of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff
Vs.
Craig Lewis, Defendant
District Court, Jefferson County, State of Colorado
Case No. 99 CR 3053

Dear Mr. Thomas:

On or about December 17, 1999 the Jefferson County grand jury indicted Craig A. Lewis, an
employee of the Globe supermarket tabloid, for committing criminal extortion and commercial
bribery.

Regarding the indictment of Mr. Lewis, you were quoted by the Associated Press on December
21, 1999 as saying that : “We believe the conduct as set forth in this indictment clearly crosses
the line of legitimate news gathering activity and violates Colorado law.”

On May 15, 2000, Jefferson County District Court Judge Jane A. Tidball denied Lewis’ Motion to
Dismiss the indictment.

On June 21, 2000, defendant Lewis filed Petition for Relief in the Nature of Prohibition or
Mandamus and for Issuance of a Rule to show cause pursuant to C.A.R. 21 with the Colorado
Supreme Court.

On June 30, 2000 the Colorado Supreme Curt entered an Order and Rule to Show Cause. On
July 31, 2000 your office filed People’s Response to Defendants’ Petition Pursuant to Rule 21,
C.A.R.

On October 26, 2000 the Colorado Supreme Court ordered that “the Rule to Show Cause
hereto entered, be, and hereby is, discharged as having been improvidently issued.”

Notwithstanding the significant litigation of the indictments of Mr. Lewis and the October 26,
2000 Supreme Court order, your office on November 9, 2000 filed People’s Motion to Dismiss
the charges against Mr. Lewis and The Globe. The motion stated that

“Defendant and his employer have made public” a statement regarding the alleged crimes and
have “donated $100,000 to the University of Colorado School of Journalism. The University will
use this money to pay an instrutor who teaches on the subject of Ethics in Journalism.” In
regard to the dismissal of charges against Mr. Lewis, the November 9, 2000 Rocky Mountain
News quoted you as saying “It is very unusual”.

At a meeting at your office on September 17, 2001, you told us that several lawyers
representing Mr. Lewis and The Globe met with you to discuss the charges against Mr. Lewis.
You said that at least one of the lawyers attending that meeting attempted to influence your
official decision and action regarding the indictment of Mr. Lewis through enclosed afficavits of
Fleet Russell White, Jr. and Priscilla Brown White). By doing so, that person violated Section
18-8-306 C.R.S., Attempt to influence a public servant, and possibly other Colorado criminal
statutes.

We hereby request that the conduct of the person or persons who illegally attempted to
influence your decision or actions concerning Mr. Lewis’ indictment be investigated and
prosecuted. We further request that your office cause the appointment of a special prosecutor
for that purpose and that you recommend to the Colorado Attorney General that the matter be
referred to a state grand jury for investigation.

We would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Fleet Russell White, Jr.
Priscilla Brown White

Cc: Bill Owens, Governor of Colorado
Ken Salazar, Attorney General of Colorado
Mary Keenan, District Attorney of the Twentieth Judicial District
John Suthers, United States Attorney

The undersigned hereby sweard and affirms as follows:

1. My name is Fleet Russell White, Jr.

2. I reside at (address redacted)

3. On September 19, 2000, I met with Jefferson County Deputy District Attorney Dennis Hall.
At that meeting, Mr. Hall stated that David Kendall, a lawyer with the Washington, D.C. office of
the Williams & Connolly law firm had visited Mr. Hall and Jefferson District Attorney David
Thomas earlier that year and had attempted to persuade Mr. Hall and Mr. Thomas to dismiss
the indictment of Mr. Craig A. Lewis, an employee of the Globe, a supermarket tabloid. Also at
the meeting, Mr. Hall indicated that the ultimate objective of the Lewis prosecution was to bring
criminal charges against Globe executives who shared responsibility for the illegal actions of
Mr. Lewis.

4. On September 29, 2000, I met with Mr. Bob Brown, an investigator for the Colorado Bureau
of Investigation. Also present at the meeting was my wife, Priscilla Brown White. At that
meeting, Mr. Brown stated that Mr. Kendall had visited the Jefferson County District Attorney in
June 2000 for the purpose of persuading the District Attorney to dismiss the indictment of Mr.
Lewis.

5. On September 17, 2001 I attended a meeting at the Jefferson County District Attorney’s
office. The people present at the meeting were my wife, Priscilla Brown White, Denver lawyer
Craig R. Truman, Jefferson County District Attorney David Thomas; and Jefferson County
Deputy District Attorney Charles Tingle. The meeting was held in a conference room at the
Jefferson County District Attorney’s office. At that meeting, the 1999 indictments of Thomas C.
Miller and Craig A. Lewis by the Jefferson County grand jury were discussed by those present.
During the course of that discussion, I recall asking Mr. Thomas why, in November 2000, his
office chose to dismiss charges against Mr. Lewis in consideration of a $100,000 payment by
Globe International to the University of Colorado School of Journalism and Mass
Communication. I recall Mr. Thomas stating that the decision to dismiss the charges against Mr.
Lewis was made in order to avoid a lengthy and expensive prosecution. I also recall him
describing a meeting with lawyers representing Mr. Lewis and including “Bill Clinton’s attorney”
who I assumed to be Mr. Kendall.
I clearly recall Mr. Thomas stating that one of the lawyers present at that meeting attempted to
persuade him to dismiss the indictment of Mr. Lewis by threatening Mr. Thomas with reprisals
having to do with Mr. Thomas’ career and work that Mr. Thomas might seek in the future.
Further the Affiant sayeth not.
Date: October 22, 2002

Fleet Russell White, Jr.

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me by Fleet Russell White, Jr. this 22nd day of October
2002

WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL

Notary Public (name not legible)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

AFFIDAVIT OF PRISCILLA BROWN WHITE

The undersigned hereby swears and affirms as follows:

1. My name is Priscilla Brown White

2. I reside at (address redacted)

3. On September 29, 2000, I met with Mr. Bob Brown, an investigator for the Colorado Bureau
of Investigation. Also present at the meeting was my husband, Fleet Russell White, Jr. At that
meeting, Mr. Brown stated that Mr. David Kendall, a lawyer with the Washington D.C. office of
the Williams & Connelly law firm had visited the Jefferson County District Attorney in June 2000
for the purpose of persuading the District Attorney to dismiss the December 1999 Jefferson
County grand jury indictment of Mr. Craig Lewis, an employee of the Globe, a supermarket
tabloid.

4. On September 17, 2001, I attended a meeting at the Jefferson County District Attorney’s
office. The people present at the meeting were my husband, Fleet Russell White, Jr.; his
lawyer, Craig R. Truman, Jefferson County District Attorney David Thomas; and Jefferson
County Deputy District Attorney Charles Tingle. The meeting was held in a conference room at
the Jefferson County District Attorney’s office. At that meeting, the December 1999 indictments
of Thomas C. Miller and Craig Lewis by the Jefferson County grand jury were discussed by
those present. During the course of that discussion, I recall my husband asking Mr. Thomas
why his office chose to dismiss charges against Mr. Lewis in consideration of a $100,000
payment by Globe International to the University of Colorado School of Journalism and Mass
Communication. I recall Mr. Thomas explaining that it was a financial decision and that
prosecuting Mr. Lewis could take another three years. I also recall Mr. Thomas stating that he
had been visited by five lawyers who attempted to persuade Mr. Thomas to dismiss the
charges against Mr. Lewis and the Globe. I also recall Mr. Thomas revealing to use that one of
the lawyers attending the meeting was “Bill Clinton’s attorney.”. At the meeting, I noted that
Mr. Thomas stating that one of the five lawyers “told him he (Mr. Thomas) will no longer work
again anywhere” if Mr. Thomas continued his prosecution of Mr. Lewis and the Globe. I also
noted Mr. Thomas stating: “I’m a small town DA and these five attorneys, Bill Clinton’s attorney
– I wasn’t intimidated. I mean I don’t think I was intimidated.”

Further the Affiant sayeth not.

Date: October 22, 2002

Priscilla Brown White

ATTACHED TO AFFIDAVIT OF PRISCILLA BROWN WHITE
DATED OCTOBER 22, 2002

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to me by Priscilla Brown White this 22nd day of October 2002

WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL

Notary Public (not legible)

October 23, 2002

Fleet Russell White, Jr.
(address redacted)

Dear Mr. White,

I received your letter dated October 22, 2002, regarding the case of People v. Craig Lewis. In
it you request that I conduct an investigation and possibly charge individuals with violations of
CRS 18-8-306. In your attached affidavits you attribute certain statements to me. I remember
the discussion quite well. I also remember the meeting I had with Mr. Kendall and other
attorneys. At no time did I believe that they were attempting to influence me in a way that
violated Colorado criminal statutes. They were aggressive and attempting to be persuasive but
nothing in their conduct breached ethics or Colorado statutes. They did refer to the fact that no
other District Attorney had taken such action against the Globe or its staff and that it may
reflect badly on my office and upon myself. At no time do I recall them telling me that I would
“no longer work again anywhere.” It is not uncommon for defense counsel to discuss with me
the community standard, the public image aspects of our decisions and how decisions might
reflect upon me as an elected official. The statute requires that the attempt to influence a public
servant be by means “of deceit or by threat of violence or economic reprisal…”. Such was not
the case in this instance.

The meeting to which you refer occurred with the respective attorneys almost two years ago.
The meeting I had with you was more than a year ago. It is hard to fathom what has prompted
you to contact me at this point in time. I respectfully decline to conduct an investigation or to
seek a special prosecutor.

Sincerely,

David J. Thomas
District Attorney