thewiz
01-26-2000, 11:19 PM
Here's the scenario: A city councilman takes $1,000 a month, cars, cell phones, and other goodies for over 3 years (total of over $35,000) from a businessman who has issues coming before the city council. Said councilman never declares any of the money on the financial disclosure forms required by the state or city.
The councilman gets caught and goes to trial in federal court (he refuses a plea bargain). The judge moves the trial to a different city to ensure a fair and impartial jury. The defense appears to be:
1. The money, etc. were gifts from the businessman to a friend.
2. The councilman claims it never influenced his vote.
3. The councilman (who is black) has done so much working for civil rights that there should be no question of his ethics. It's all a white plot to "keep the man down".
4. The councilman "forgot" to put the money down on his financial disclosure forms and pleads guilty to the oversight.
After a 2 week trial, the jury deliberated for 3.5 hours before finding him guilty on all counts of bribery. The councilman's supporters were "shocked" and were outraged that the all-white jury could have come to that decision. If the trial had been held in the councilman's hometown, they claim, he would have been found innocent.
The 74-year old councilman is now facing jail time (no probation possible under the sentencing guidelines federal judges are required to follow). His supporters again invoke the councilman's past actions to excuse the behavior and cite the age and health of the councilman for reasons he should not go to jail.
What would your verdict have been?
For the full story, go to: http://dallasnews.com/metro/22513_LIPSCOMB26.html
The councilman gets caught and goes to trial in federal court (he refuses a plea bargain). The judge moves the trial to a different city to ensure a fair and impartial jury. The defense appears to be:
1. The money, etc. were gifts from the businessman to a friend.
2. The councilman claims it never influenced his vote.
3. The councilman (who is black) has done so much working for civil rights that there should be no question of his ethics. It's all a white plot to "keep the man down".
4. The councilman "forgot" to put the money down on his financial disclosure forms and pleads guilty to the oversight.
After a 2 week trial, the jury deliberated for 3.5 hours before finding him guilty on all counts of bribery. The councilman's supporters were "shocked" and were outraged that the all-white jury could have come to that decision. If the trial had been held in the councilman's hometown, they claim, he would have been found innocent.
The 74-year old councilman is now facing jail time (no probation possible under the sentencing guidelines federal judges are required to follow). His supporters again invoke the councilman's past actions to excuse the behavior and cite the age and health of the councilman for reasons he should not go to jail.
What would your verdict have been?
For the full story, go to: http://dallasnews.com/metro/22513_LIPSCOMB26.html