CINCINNATI (WKRC) - In court filings refuting the prosecution's case against P.G. Sittenfeld, his attorneys revealed that Chinedum Ndukwe, the prosecution's star witness was not only being paid by the government but was facing his own potential legal issues.

Sittenfeld's attorneys said recent disclosures by the prosecution revealed Ndukwe was working for them in March 2018, after an investigation of him revealed his own alleged involvement in campaign finance law violations, IRA early withdrawal violations and other potential federal crimes.

"The Government has disclosed in discovery a written 'proffer' agreement it entered into with Mr. Ndukwe. The proffer agreement prohibits the Government from presenting evidence of Mr. Ndukwe's statements to the government in its case-in-chief at trial should it prosecute Mr. Ndukwe."

Ndukwe was paid to target public officials, according to the filing.

Before that, Sittenfeld and Ndukwe were friends for years, according to court filings. Sittenfeld often introduced Ndukwe to the movers and shakers in Cincinnati due to their friendship and because Cincinnati had few black developers. Ndukwe had also donated to Sittenfeld's city council campaigns as far back as 2012.

In 2018, Ndukwe called Sittenfeld and told him he had out-of-town investors interested in 435 Elm Street, a longtime problem property across from the Duke Energy Convention Center.

Ndukwe said those investors wanted to donate to Sittenfeld's campaign through multiple LLCs before a law changed in November. Sittenfeld's attorneys note such donations would be legal and Ndukwe suggested the campaign donations, not Sittenfeld.

The following month, Ndukwe said his investors wanted to donate and that, "they're gonna want to know that when it comes time to vote on 435 Elm, like whenever that, I don't know if it's next year, tow years, three years, that it's gonna be a yes vote.

Sittenfeld replied that he's always pro-development but "nothing can be illegal like.. illegally nothing can be a quid, quid quo pro".

Sittenfeld, Ndukwe and an undercover employee discussed 435 Elm several times. During those times, Sittenfeld's attorneys say he never requested campaign contributions.

During one meeting, the undercover employee offered $10,000 in cash and told him he could do whatever he wanted for the money. Sittenfeld rejected the cash offer because he wanted the donation to comply with campaign finance laws.

Undercover employees gave Sittenfeld multiple checks each for $5,000 and said they were from LLCs, making them FEC compliant. A week later, Sittenfeld returned the checks because he learned they were illegally from corporations, according to the court filing.

Sittenfeld's attorneys also dispute that the money went into a secret slush fund. Sittenfeld included the information for the fund in campaign solicitations and reported all donations to the FEC. The PAC was also registered with the FEC.

Undercover employees suggested Sittenfeld take trips with them on private plans to destinations including Las Vegas and Miami. Sittenfeld did not take them up on the offers, say his attorneys.

Sittenfeld's attorneys argue that Sittenfeld was behind the 435 Elm development because it was a "no-brainer strategic redevelopment project that would greatly benefit Cincinnati," not because he wanted donations in return for his cooperation in getting the project approved in Cincinnati City Council.

His attorneys also note that previous court rulings indicate candidates are allowed to accept campaign donations while making decisions on votes and legislation.

Sittenfeld agreed to step aside from his city council for the remainder of his term. He has maintained his innocence.