Political donor Dennis Mitsunaga, his associates and family members contributed $48,250 in campaign funds to then-­Honolulu Prosecutor Keith Kaneshiro as Kaneshiro’s office pursued a criminal case against a fired Mitsunaga employee who later sued the company for discrimination, the U.S. Attorney’s office said Wednesday on the opening day of the federal bribery trial of Kaneshiro, Mitsunaga and four of Mitsunaga’s employees.

A Honolulu Police Department detective and the original deputy prosecutor who investigated allegations of theft by the former employee, Laurel Mau, concluded there was insufficient evidence, U.S. Deputy Attorney Michael Wheat said in his opening arguments.

Criminal theft charges — that Mau had used Mitsu­naga company time and resources to do “side jobs” just like other Mitsunaga employees — were eventually filed against Mau after Kaneshiro later assigned the case to a deputy prosecutor who had been in Kaneshiro’s office for just four months, Wheat said.

Mitsunaga employees videotaped Mau as she left the company after being fired on Nov. 10, 2011, videotaped her again after she was arraigned on felony theft charges in Circuit Court, sued her and challenged her unemployment claim, which was upheld, and then appealed that ruling, Wheat said.

In June 2019, Wheat and his team from San Diego won federal corruption convictions in the same federal courtroom — where Kaneshiro, Mitsunaga and their co-defendants are now on trial — against Honolulu’s former Police Chief Louis Kealoha, then 58; his then-wife, former Deputy Prosecutor Katherine Kealoha, then 48; and their co-conspirators, Honolulu Police Department officers Minh-Hung “Bobby” Nguyen, then 45, and Lt. Derek Wayne Hahn, then 47.

Their convictions came nearly six years to the day since the Kealohas staged the theft of the mailbox at their Kahala home in a scheme designed to keep cash flowing — including money from Katherine Kealoha’s grandmother, who lived to see them convicted of stealing the proceeds of a reverse mortgage Katherine had set up for her.

The Kealoha corruption and conspiracy trial included 70 witnesses, 16 days of testimony and three days of closing arguments.

But it took the 12 jurors only one day to find the Kealohas — and two of their three fellow defendants — guilty on each of four felony counts.

Katherine Kealoha served under Kaneshiro when he was Honolulu prosecutor.

After Mau was fired from Mitsu­naga &Associates, she filed a federal sex and age discrimination lawsuit against the company in September 2012.

A company employee, Terri Ann Otani, reached out to friend and then-Council member Ann Kobayashi in October 2012 to arrange a face-to-face meeting between Kaneshiro and Mitsunaga to discuss the theft allegations against Mau, Wheat said.

Three weeks after their first meeting, on Oct. 1, 2012, the first donations of $13,250 from Mitsunaga, his family and employees were reported by Kaneshiro’s political campaign.

More than a month later, on Nov. 6, 2012, Kaneshiro won reelection “and records show he has no debt to pay off,” Wheat said.

Mitsunaga company attorney Sheri Jean Tanaka then wrote a letter to Kaneshiro asking him to pursue criminal charges against Mau, Wheat said.

The following January, Mitsunaga hosted Kaneshiro for lunch at Mariposa restaurant in Ala Moana Center.

Another $10,000 in Mitsunaga-related campaign donations were then reported by Kaneshiro’s campaign, Wheat said.

In June 2013, Kaneshiro then assigned the initial deputy prosecutor to look into the theft allegations, Wheat said.

In November, another $9,000 in Mitsunaga-related donations were reported by Kaneshiro’s campaign. They included donations by Mitsunaga and his wife that exceeded campaign spending limits, prompting the campaign to return the excess, Wheat said.

Tanaka “refused” to provide documentations of Mau’s alleged theft to the HPD detective assigned to the case, Wheat said. But Tanaka told the detective that Mau had been harassing Mitsunaga and other employees, Wheat said.

A jury hearing Mau’s discrimination lawsuit in July 2014 ruled against Mau but assessed just $1 in penalties, prompting Otani to urge tax officials to assess interest on the $1, Wheat said.

In August, Kaneshiro then assigned the pursuit of allegations against Mau to a new deputy in his office, who was then “spoon fed” thousands of pages of allegations from Tanaka that included “false and misleading statements” by Mitsunaga employees, Wheat said.

A judge rejected the criminal complaint because it included “no law enforcement declaration,” Wheat said. “… There was no basis for that charge.”

An officer eventually signed a declaration and Kaneshiro issued a warrant for Mau’s arrest “for theft exceeding $300,” Wheat said.

Mau was charged with four felony counts of theft on On Dec. 1, 2014.

She appeared for arraignment in Circuit Court during a hearing attended by Otani, Tanaka and their co-defendant Chad Michael McDonald — another Mitsunaga employee — “to watch Laurel Mau’s humiliation” and then videotaped her leaving court, Wheat said.

“There’s only one criminal side job,” Wheat said. “That’s Keith Kaneshiro’s side job … prosecuting Laurel Mau for personal gain.”

In October 2015, Kaneshiro’s campaign reported another $13,000 from Mitsunaga-affiliated donors.

Then in January 2016, Kaneshiro attended Mitsu­naga’s “gala New Year’s party,” Wheat said.

In September 2017, a judge dismissed the criminal case against Mau for lack of probable cause, followed by Kaneshiro speaking publicly about wanting to appeal the dismissal, Wheat said.

Then in October 2017, Wheat said that Kaneshiro’s deputies convinced him that an appeal would likely fail.

“Laurel Mau had the courage to stand up for herself,” Wheat said.

Mau was a central figure on the first day of the trial.

Attorneys for Kaneshiro, Mitsunaga and their co-­defendants portrayed her as greedy and manipulative to keep doing side work on company time, using company email and phones and the company’s name to obtain building permits for projects not sanctioned by Mitsunaga &Associates.

Kaneshiro’s attorney, Birney Bervar, asked Kaneshiro to stand up for the jury to more clearly see him as Bervar began his opening statement.

Kaneshiro pursued a criminal case against Mau because a “crime” had been committed, Bervar said.

Bervar said Kaneshiro did not accept donations to any personal accounts and, like other attorneys for Kaneshiro’s co-defendants, emphasized that campaign donations are legal, carefully documented and a “First Amendment right.”

He acknowledged that prominent donors like Mi­tsunaga “get access” to politicians but said “the evidence will show this is not a bribery.”

During their 2012 initial meeting, Bervar said that Mitsunaga expressed that he was “unsatisfied” that the initial investigation into theft allegations against Mau had been dropped.

But the following January, during their lunch at Mariposa, Bervar said that neither Mau nor campaign contributions were discussed.

In June 2014, the initial deputy prosecutor who declined to pursue charges against Mau told Kaneshiro “there’s no case there” and Bervar said the deputy will testify that there was “no pressure whatsoever … and Keith abided by that.”

Then, during her July 2014 civil trial against the company, Mau acknowledged under questioning having used company time and resources for side jobs, prompting Tanaka to seek another meeting with Kaneshiro in which she said that Mau “‘confessed and we’ve got the evidence here,” Bervar said.

Kaneshiro then assigned the case to deputy Jake Delaplane, who had worked for Kaneshiro for just four months.

But Bervar said that Delaplane had been Kauai’s first deputy prosecutor after working as a deputy prosecutor in Atlanta and had experience with white-collar crimes.

Delaplane filed criminal charges against Mau and will testify that Kaneshiro never pressured him to do so, Bervar said.

After the case was dismissed in December 2017, Kaneshiro’s appellate deputies said they should not appeal.

There is no evidence of bribery, Bervar said.

“The evidence shows that Keith Kaneshiro is not guilty,” he said.

Mitsunaga’s defense attorney, Nina Marino, also asked Mitsunaga to stand to be recognized as he waved to the jury.

She called Mitsunaga “a kind, thoughtful employer,” who had given Mau raises in the thousands of dollars and considered her a friend.

Mitsunaga’s interest in local and national politics “is essential to this case,” Marino said.

Between 2010 and 2020, Mitsunaga, his family and friends contributed over $2 million to 121 candidates, Marino said.

Their donations to Kaneshiro represented less than 3% of their total political donations, she said.

When Mau wrote a letter to Mitsunaga in 2004 that she was being sexually harassed by a co-worker, Marino said “Mr. Mitsunaga made sure it was addressed,” suspended the male employee without pay, ordered him into counseling, demoted him and reassigned his desk away from Mau and out of the main office.

In 2007, Mau then wrote another letter to Mitsunaga saying that office morale was low and he responded by giving her a $5,000 raise, Marino said.

“He was a good boss and he considered her a friend of the family,” Marino said.

Then in 2011, Mau asked Mitsunaga for a raise, arguing that she had saved the company money. Mitsunaga talked to her supervisors and reviewed her time sheets and concluded “that she had lied” and was manipulative, Marino said.

Mitsunaga gave Mau a $10,000 raise, nevertheless, “in the hope of moving forward,” Marino said.

Mitsunaga was primarily working from home at the time and only later was told that Aaron Shunichi Fujii — who is also on trial — had fired Mau after the company was sued by a Mau client for construction defects “for work she did on her own” using the company name, Marino said.

Tanaka and Fujii then discovered other unauthorized projects.

“She was double dipping,” Marino said.

Mau’s subsequent discrimination suit after she was fired, Marino said, “was an obvious play for money.”

Mitsunaga’s campaign donations gave him political access, but Marino said “there was no discussions of a bribe” when he and Kaneshiro met.

In fact, Mitsunaga liked Kaneshiro and liked him even more after each meeting, Marino said.

“Mr. Mitsunaga did not bribe Keith Kaneshiro,” Marino said. “… There will be no evidence of a crime because no crime has been committed.”

The first day of the trial ended with testimony from a former Mitsunaga employee who had been instructed to videotape Mau on the day she was fired in 2011.

Jurors were shown the video of Tanaka and other Mitsunaga employees packing up Mau’s belongings and loading them into her car.