Following the verdict, jury forewoman Tyheshia Smith-Kruck, the only jury member to speak to reporters, said the jury had no doubts about Wilkes' guilt.

“The evidence was enough to convict him of all charges,” she said.

Smith-Kruck did express surprise and disappointment that Cunninghan never took the stand.

“It would have been nice to hear his perspective on what happened, seeing that he's at the center of all this,” she said.

Wilkes walked out of the Edward J. Schwartz federal courthouse downtown and walked away from reporters without a word, leaving that task to his defense attorney, Mark Geragos.

Geragos said the verdict “was fatally flawed,” saying the defense had offered “more than ample evidence to raise reasonable doubt.”

“I fully expected the worst case to be a hung jury,” he said.

The lawyer said he would prove that information about the indictment was leaked from the federal grand jury to the media prior to the trial, which he said would be grounds for Judge Larry A. Burns to set aside the verdict. A hearing on the leaks allegation was set for Dec. 11.

The verdict ended a three-week-long trial that was awash in bureaucratic acronyms like GDIC and FIRES, and the minutia of congressional budgets. It was also punctuated by eye-popping revelations of $4,000 dinners at Las Vegas resorts, a stay in a $6,600-per-night Hawaiian suite and the salacious appearance of two prostitutes who said they were hired to have sex with Wilkes and Cunningham.

This was the first criminal trial connected to the congressional bribery scandal that drove Cunningham from office and – after he pleaded guilty to conspiracy and tax evasion – into a federal prison cell where he is serving an eight-year sentence.

Wilkes was tried on 13 charges of conspiracy, bribery, money laundering and honest services wire fraud.

Prosecutors contended that from 1997 to 2004 he showered Cunningham with gifts small and large. In all, they alleged, he leveraged $625,000 in cash bribes and tens of thousands more in gifts ranging from meals to computers in exchange for Cunningham's influence in appropriating money and pressuring bureaucrats to award contracts to ADCS Inc., Wilkes' company.

Wilkes forcefully denied bribing Cunningham. He testified that his interactions with the congressman were legitimate and legal, and his activity was simply “business as usual” in the lobbying and appropriations culture in Washington, D.C.

A central part of that culture is the process of earmarks – where representatives insert money into budgets for programs with no oversight. That was a key component of the trial, with the government alleging Wilkes plied Cunningham to get earmarks into the Pentagon budget and then lean on bureaucrats to steer contracts to his company.

In addition to meals, there were flights in private jets, computers and software purchased for the congressman, and two small jet boats and a dock.

The big-ticket items in the case involved a $100,000 payment Wilkes made to Cunningham in 2000. Prosecutors said it was a bribe. Wilkes, however, maintained he was buying Cunningham's boat, the Kelly C. But the deal was never completed, according to Wilkes, because congressional staffers objected, saying that it was wrong for someone with business before Cunningham to pay him for the boat.

Wilkes said he told the staffers to unwind the deal and get his money back. He never did. Wilkes explained that he did not want to ask Cunningham for it back lest he offend the congressman.

Prosecutors also focused on a $525,000 wire transfer in May 2004 that Wilkes made to a New York financial company.

The company was controlled by Thomas Kontogiannis, who pleaded guilty earlier this year to providing $1.1 million in mortgages to Cunningham for a Rancho Santa Fe mansion, even though he knew the house was bought with proceeds from illegal activity.

Wilkes testified that the wire transfer was not, as the government said, a bribe to pay off Cunningham's mortgage on the mansion. Instead, he said it was a short-term investment he made – at Cunningham's suggestion.

But prosecutors noted that there was no description of the investment, no contract or prospectus that Wilkes received before or after the wire transfer. Wilkes said he tried to get the money back, but prosecutors scoffed and said there were no records that he diligently pursued it.

Two prostitutes also testified that they were hired to have sex with the congressman and Wilkes during a trip to Hawaii. One picked Cunningham out of a photo lineup shown to the jury. Joel Combs, a nephew of Wilkes and key government witness who testified under immunity, said his uncle gave him money and told him to hire the women.

Wilkes denied this.

[may have played in steering earmarks to certain entities,” said the source, who would only speak on the condition of anonymity.

The investigation is being handled by the U.S. Attorney's Office in Los Angeles, which has issued subpoenas, the source said. A second government source confirmed the investigation..........