Two women accused of stealing funds from Fourt Street Baptist Church

The attorney representing a couple accused of swindling more than $3 million out of a family argues in a Tuesday motion that a prosecutor made “false” and “reckless” statements that misled a judge at their bond hearing.

On the same day, Chief Assistant District Attorney Alonza Whitaker motioned for a judge to examine whether attorney Frank Martin’s representation of Michael K. Bleckley and Phillis M. Bleckley of Richland, Ga., is a conflict of interest.

Martin, who represents the couple who owns the Warm Springs restaurant The Bulloch House, said Whitaker told Muscogee County Superior Court Chief Judge John Allen misstatements at a Sept. 4 hearing that “obviously influenced the trial court to assess an unreasonable and excessive bond of $1,500,000 per defendant.”

Whitaker said his information came from investigators and that he stands by it.

Martin states that Whitaker told the judge that Michael Bleckley had a $1 million offshore account, owned an airplane and had a pilot’s license. All are false, Martin said, adding that Bleckley last owned a plane about two years ago and that he couldn’t have a valid pilot’s license because he doesn’t have a medical report that would authorize one.

“We’re real upset about the way this was handled because the judge was misled,” Martin said. “Nobody can post a bond like that.”

Charges against couple

The Bleckleys are accused of using MKB Capital Management to take $3,408,703 from the Kim family that runs Mikata Japanese Steakhouse and Sushi Bar, claiming to have invested it with good returns. They met with the Kims quarterly to present financial reports, at one point stating that a terrorist attack in the Middle East had increased the return on investments, Whitaker said.

When the Kims tried to collect their money, the Bleckleys changed their company name and said the money had gone into a software research firm expected to bring in a return of $18 million, the prosecutor said.

In his motion asking for an inquiry into whether there’s a conflict of interest, Whitaker states that Martin’s representation of both the Bleckleys could affect his duty to use his professional judgment for each client.

“It’s hard for Frank to say, ‘One is not as guilty as the other’ if you’re representing both,” Whitaker said. “There’s always different degrees of culpability.”

Martin said the Bleckleys’ defense aren’t in conflict with each other and that there isn’t a basis for prosecutors to complain.

Attorney John Martin, Frank Martin’s son, filed a motion with the court Tuesday to become Phillis Bleckley’s attorney. Whitaker said he made no distinction in a potential conflict when attorneys from the same firm represent different defendants.

A hearing on the potential conflict is scheduled for noon Friday before Superior Court Judge Doug Pullen.