Workman could conceivably speed up the process by seeking a plea agreement, but there's no guarantee Yocom would go along with it. In any case, Workman herself has said she has no interest in a plea agreement since, in her confidence that she will be exonerated, she prefers to see the case through to its end.

The panel's case against Workman is not trivial. Its members concluded that Workman "lied," that "her accounts are fluid to cover her own tracks" and that she engaged in "acts of deception" to trick others (including her own chief administrative officer) into thinking the employees were working for the health department. The panel said Workman's actions were "calculated . . . to circumvent the safeguards that were in place to prevent misuse of public funds."

With regard to the conduct of the investigation, the panel concluded that the actions of investigator Craig Watson were "completed without bias and in a competent and professional manner" and that he "should be commended for his diligence and professionalism."

Workman's side paints a different picture. Her daughter, Aisza Wilde, contends that Watson browbeat and harassed Wilde and others at the Boys and Girls Clubs. Yengich added Thursday that "the animus of Watson toward my client was palpable when we were in the room together" when the panel interviewed Workman.

Yengich's own investigator, who says he went through much the same process as Watson, said Watson "was biased ... and concluded that Workman was guilty prior to any investigation and interviews."

"I'm not badmouthing" panel members, Yengich said. "They're all people I respect. But any investigation is tainted or not tainted by the direction taken by the investigator."

---

E-mail: aedwards@desnews.com