TRENTON — Celebration of a major legal victory devolved into a schoolyard spat Monday, with the two most powerful law enforcement agencies in New Jersey vying for the spotlight. In an unusually public and pointed feud, the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the state Attorney General’s Office each claimed credit for a national, $150 million health care fraud settlement. First...
N.J. Attorney General Paula Dow, seen in this file photo, has engaged in a public dispute with the U.S. Attorney's Office over which agency deserves credit for a health care fraud bust announced Monday.TRENTON — Celebration of a major legal victory devolved into a schoolyard spat Monday, with the two most powerful law enforcement agencies in New Jersey vying for the spotlight.
In an unusually public and pointed feud, the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the state Attorney General’s Office each claimed credit for a national, $150 million health care fraud settlement.
First Assistant U.S. Attorney J. Gilmore Childers fired the first shot in a statement to reporters, saying the state "played a limited administrative role in this case."
"It is troubling and disappointing that they would take credit for years of tireless work done by federal agents and prosecutors," Childers said, "particularly concerning an issue so important to the people of New Jersey."
It only took an hour for Attorney General Paula Dow to return the volley, calling Childers’ account a "mischaracterization."
She said he was "downplaying the role of the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office in leading 41 states to participate in this important national healthcare fraud case."
The fight didn’t end there. Federal authorities fired back one more time.
"While pretending to be disinterested in who gets credit, the AG’s office has continued to make claims about its role that are not true," a spokeswoman, Rebekah Carmichael, said in a statement.
Behind-the-scenes turf battles are not uncommon in law enforcement. But the dueling criticisms stunned the state’s close-knit legal world, with former officials from both offices marveling at the heated and overt nature of the feud.
"Although it’s not unusual for tensions to exist among law enforcement agencies, it’s unusual and unfortunate when those kinds of internal disputes become public," former Attorney General John Farmer Jr. said.
Shavar Jeffries, who was counsel to Attorney General Anne Milgram, said: "That’s very odd. It’s unusual to have a public spat about who gets credit."
Wally Timpone, chief of special prosecutions at the U.S. Attorney’s Office until 1995, said competition is usually more fierce when prosecutors tackle hot-button issues.
Sometimes authorities clash over gang and corruption cases, he said, but right now health care fraud is under the microscope.
"This will be all over in a week," Timpone said, adding that when it comes to prosecutions, competition is often healthy.
Public arguments between the agencies can be more serious than just a question of who gets credit. Historically, the state attorney general office has been viewed as less muscular than that of the U..S. attorney.
In 2006, when Gov. Chris Christie was the U.S. attorney for New Jersey, he accused state authorities of botching a years-long corruption investigation of the South Jersey powerbroker George Norcross.
Christie sent a six-page letter to the state saying a federal case was not possible because "the state investigation was materially hampered by poor oversight, inexplicable strategic decisions and a failure to fully develop potential evidence." State officials defended their work.
By Christopher Baxter and Chris Megerian/The Star-Ledger
Star-Ledger Statehouse reporters on Twitter
Related coverage:
• Tuckerton man's resolve helps uncover multimillion-dollar health care fraud
• Nine Maxim Healthcare employees charged as company reaches $150M settlement in fraud case