Rep. Duncan Hunter's attorneys are urging a federal judge to put off-limits any discussion of his intimacy with women. | Joe Raedle/Getty Images legal Duncan Hunter's lawyers respond to prosecution's claims on affairs

Defense lawyers for Rep. Duncan Hunter appeared to concede Friday that he carried on extramarital affairs with several women, but alleged that much of his related spending of campaign funds was legitimate because he was “mixing business with pleasure.”

With Hunter (R-Calif.) facing a federal criminal trial on 60 felony charges that he repeatedly spent campaign money on vacations, meals and even dental bills, Hunter’s attorneys are urging a federal judge to put off-limits any discussion of his intimacy with the women, saying it would risk his right to a fair trial.


His defense also faulted prosecutors for airing the infidelity claims publicly by including them in a motion Monday asking a judge to allow jurors to hear testimony about the nature of the relationships.

“However unpopular the notion of a married man mixing business with pleasure, the Government cannot simply dismiss the reality that Mr. Hunter’s relationships with [the women] often served an overtly political purpose that would not have existed irrespective of his occupation,” Hunter lawyers Greg Vega, Ricardo Arias and Philip Adams wrote.

“Mr. Hunter is not on trial for being an unfaithful husband, yet this evidence invites the trier of fact to punish Mr. Hunter for his infidelity despite what the case shows actually happened,” the congressman’s defense team added.

Prosecutors contend that in part because the women were lobbyists or House staffers, the government needs to mention the intimate nature of the relationships to explain why the expenditures on hotels, bar outings and Uber rides were clearly personal and not political, but defense attorneys said there’s no need to get into such detail.

Hunter’s defense urged U.S. District Judge Thomas Whelan not to give in to what they criticized as an effort to “embarrass” their client.

“While this salacious evidence provides welcomed [sic] fodder for the media, as evidenced by the attention this Motion received from both national and local news outlets, its questionable probative value is substantially outweighed by the unquestionable danger of unfair prejudice to Mr. Hunter,” they wrote.

Hunter’s wife Margaret was also charged in the criminal case. She pleaded guilty to a single felony conspiracy count earlier this month and is cooperating with prosecutors.

Prosecutors have signaled plans to call Margaret Hunter as a witness against her husband. If the judge permits that and allows evidence of Duncan Hunter’s infidelity, the trial currently set for September could become an emotion-packed spectacle and morality play.

Adding to the volatile mix: an apparent strategy by the congressman’s defense to blame his wife for hundreds of thousands of dollars in alleged personal expenses charged to campaign credit cards.

Defense filings Friday again signaled that lawyers plan to argue that Margaret Hunter had the primary role in managing the family’s finances. She also served as his paid campaign manager and frequently interacted with the campaign treasurer.

“Mr. Hunter’s military service is relevant to show he left his family’s financial responsibilities to his wife while on deployment in Iraq and Afghanistan, and this arrangement continued throughout the period of the indictment,” the defense lawyers wrote.

Defense lawyers are also urging Whelan to rule that conversations and text messages exchanged by the Hunters are covered by spousal privilege and that Margaret Hunter does not have the right to waive that privilege.

Prosecutors contend the communications are admissible because the congressman and his wife were co-conspirators.

In court filings Monday, prosecutors also urged the judge to instruct Duncan Hunter to stop using public appearances and media interviews to attack the prosecution as politically motivated.

But Hunter’s defense told the judge any such warning would be improper because he has a right to make such statements to reassure constituents of his innocence.

“Mr. Hunter is a candidate for the United States Congress and as such, he is entitled to publicly discuss his present situation with the voters at town hall meetings and other public forums so the voters can then make an informed decision in casting their vote,” the defense team wrote. “The Government’s request to admonish Mr. Hunter will have a negative ‘chilling effect’ on Mr. Hunter’s ability to campaign. This Court should resist the Government’s attempt to insert the court in any way into a political campaign.

The judge is scheduled to hold a hearing Monday on the pending motions.

This article tagged under: Duncan Hunter