tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post8810599997227770330..comments2023-10-22T09:32:13.417-04:00Comments on Big Trial | Philadelphia Trial Blog: Government Winds Down Pathetic Farnese Corruption CaseAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04116104602505815614noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-7180001954088576842017-01-27T18:26:56.357-05:002017-01-27T18:26:56.357-05:00Agreed.
One interesting thought - if a campaign ...Agreed. <br /><br />One interesting thought - if a campaign donor wanted to send the kid to school, they could have donated directly, and no crime would occur. <br /><br />Now, if Farnese had ASKED a donor if they would help send the kid to school, that would likely be a Hobbs Act violation - extortion under color of official right. Interestingly, one witness suggested that Farnese may have or would have attempted to find a donor, but didn't.<br /><br />A politician asking, "Can you donate to such and such instead of my campaign" is likely Hobbs Act extortion because of the pressure the politician's request creates. <br /><br />Yet simply moving the money without even asking cannot possibly be any less criminal. It would be very weird if the law allowed what Farnese did without permission but would have criminalized it if he had asked for permission. <br /><br />It seems that Farnese committed a crime in the process of skirting another one. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-50334950197784613942017-01-27T18:12:23.296-05:002017-01-27T18:12:23.296-05:00The fed doesn't work on a cost-per-case calcul...The fed doesn't work on a cost-per-case calculation. They've said that repeatedly, particularly the IRS. They seek high-profile individuals and make examples out of them so they don't need to do it very often. <br /><br />That is their enforcement strategy. If they lock Farnese up for $6000, they've sent the message they want.<br /><br />Though I suspect in Farnese's case it is something of a pilot. It took five years to bring the case. It was either an audit, or one of the witnesses is more upset than they let on, or it's a throwaway test case to see where the line between official act and routine access falls. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-18465584719490820942017-01-27T10:19:37.328-05:002017-01-27T10:19:37.328-05:00You may think that when State Senator Farnese gave...You may think that when State Senator Farnese gave $6,000 to a commitee woman for her support and vote it is just South Philly politics as usual. No this is a crime he used other peoples money to get a stronger hold on the area by becoming the ward leader. You may try to belittle the prosecutor but it was Senator Farnese who crossed the line and by doing so became a criminal. Lets get rid of all the politicans who think it is ok as Fumo stated to spend OPM (Other Peoples Money) illegally. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-33205587336930593542017-01-27T08:38:18.492-05:002017-01-27T08:38:18.492-05:006K versus the gigantic amt of your tax dollars spe...6K versus the gigantic amt of your tax dollars spent to investigate and prosecute this dumpster fire. Commend?. No. Its an ethical violation dressed up.Should have been handled as such.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-49716691422927326692017-01-26T15:38:26.280-05:002017-01-26T15:38:26.280-05:00HOW IN THE WORLD!!! DID HE GET IN THIS MESS!!!???HOW IN THE WORLD!!! DID HE GET IN THIS MESS!!!???Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-58981294032514700092017-01-26T15:13:16.030-05:002017-01-26T15:13:16.030-05:00Great article in the Marshall Project today on a n...Great article in the Marshall Project today on a new breed of incoming District Attorneys who campaigned on less punitive sentences, marijuana decriminalization, opposition to the death penalty and charging fewer juveniles as adults. Since criminal justice happens in the states and counties, these policy shifts could have a great impact. <br />CHICAGO<br />Kim Foxx replaced controversial incumbent Anita Alverez. Fox ordered prosecutors to stop charging low level shoplifting as a felony.<br />HOUSTON<br />Incomer Kim Ogg fired nearly 40 prosecutors and replaced them with experienced defense attorneys , a rare change of persepective for a prosecutors office, in key positions, including chief of staff and trial chief, and created an office of professional integrity to hold prosecutors to ethical guidelines, such has when to hand over evidence to the defense and how.<br />AUSTIN TEXAS<br />Newly elected DA Margaret Moore is restaffing effort of her own, she informed 27 if the offices existing prosecutors that their services were no longer needed and replaced them with lawyers known for having a good reputation in the defense community, it was the most sweeping personnel shift in the DA's office in decades. <br />DENVER<br />New DA Beth McCann said her office will no longer seek the death penalty, she stated " I don't think the state should be in the business of killing people"<br />JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA<br />Melissa Nelson replaced incumbent state attorney Angela Corey who was nationally known for her zealous pursuit of the death penalty. She created a panel of lawyers to evaluate all the death penalty cases in part to make sure that no mitigating evidence gets neglected. She also crated a team of prosecutors whose job whose job it is to identity wrongful convictions and reverses them.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-74754343267006907362017-01-26T14:56:01.501-05:002017-01-26T14:56:01.501-05:00It is interesting that he got the letter and the v...It is interesting that he got the letter and the visit, all while his wife was pregnant. That sure doesn't sound like he got special treatment unless somebody didn't like his wife. <br /><br />I don't know if this has been answered, but how did the Feds come to find this case in the first place, if nobody seems particularly upset about it? <br /><br />It almost appears they are doing campaign finance audits. Which, if I were a politician, I'd take VERY seriously. You don't want to be on the losing end of the FBI/IRS's finely tuned algorithms for spitting fraud. I wonder if the simple fact that the donation was an outlier put them on the trail. If so, this could be the warm-up round. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-12926781194282905852017-01-26T13:54:08.005-05:002017-01-26T13:54:08.005-05:00I find it interesting that Mucellin would get a ta...I find it interesting that Mucellin would get a target letter being married to someone who worked in the US Atorneys office, its how they operate, trying to put as much stress on an individual as possible. Maybe he will now have another point of view , one shared by other witnesses and defendants, but threatening witnesses with jail time is usually the only way the prosecution gets the information they desire for a conviction. <br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-21282892169054743462017-01-26T13:32:56.032-05:002017-01-26T13:32:56.032-05:00I am in favor of an investigation into the US Atto...I am in favor of an investigation into the US Attorneys office, its usually the same characters going after politicians. I agree that there is no middle ground when it comes to discipline, there seems to be only one way to handle such issues, its disgrace and throw away the key,with the Inky fanning the flames of hatred toward anyone who is indicted by the prosecution.<br />Jurors don't want to send good people to jail because a prosecutor is telling them a defendant deserves to go to jail and that they have violated the integrity of their office. What about the prosecution that resorted to lying to get an indictment or lying at trial to get a conviction. Which sin is greater, who violated their office. <br />Take care of ethical issues, don't turn them into criminal issues.<br /><br />Traffic Court was one such case, judges that heard between 100,000 and 125,0000 citation each year were indicted on less than four tickets each. Watching the prosecution lie at trial as well as realizing they lied to get the indictment in the first place was sickening. More sickening was the Inky not reporting what actually happened in the courtroom after they had already condemned the defendants, no sense reporting the truth.<br /> <br />If the Supreme Court had an issue with Traffic Court they should have taken care of it themselves, instead they let their friends in the federal building do the dirty work for them. The selection of judges that were indicted spoke volumes as well the the one judge that escaped an indictment.Nothing much left to the imagination there. Traffic Court was a set up between the Supreme Court and federal prosecutors. <br /> <br />No one is suggesting that there be no disciplinary action be taken on such issues,just stop dragging people into federal court for unnecessary trials and sentencing good people to decades in prison for ethical issues.<br /><br /> All trials that could have been handled by disciplinary boards that are handled in federal court should be personally financed by each individual prosecutor not the federal government and the taxpayers. Additional prosecutors should be held in contempt for bringing such a case into federal court when such a matter could have been held at the state or city level.<br /><br />Bullying seems to be in fashion at the moment in our country and I suggest that the Inky has taken part in the bullying of defendants for years at the instructions of the prosecution. Either stay out of the courtroom or get the facts correct.<br /><br /> I suggest The Inky investigates the new information just posted to the Innocence Projects website, the facts are startling how many people plead guilty to avoid death or decades in prison, all were found to be innocent but were forced to plead guilty to crimes they did not commit by the prosecution to get a conviction. It was almost unwatchable. Now that is what I consider newsworthy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-22955477014247983872017-01-25T22:43:34.556-05:002017-01-25T22:43:34.556-05:00That's a good point. It does seem that there&#...That's a good point. It does seem that there's no middle ground between a mistake and a life-ending conviction. <br /><br />It's tough though - you have to send the message that campaign donations are not slush funds. <br /><br />I think some of this is a byproduct of years past and tough on crime attitudes. There probably is a civil remedy here - let's say a tenfold penalty on illegal use of campaign funds. That would certainly discourage personal enrichment, but would not render folks unable to earn a living.<br /><br />On the other hand, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are in no apparent hurry to reform the penal code and make the punishment fit the crime - factoring in the effects of a criminal record and loss of license, etc. <br /><br />Farnese being one of those lawmakers sitting idle as so many folks lose their economic standing in society over marijuana sales and other minor transgressions, it's hard to feel much sympathy. If you were going to punish anyone for crappy laws, start with the lawmakers. If they fall victim to the traps that their own peers set, so be it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-28093201782155564162017-01-25T22:13:41.756-05:002017-01-25T22:13:41.756-05:00Even in a short case, the government excels at bor...Even in a short case, the government excels at boring people to death. <br /><br />Can't this guy get fined for improper use of campaign funds or something, and then have to pay it back? Do we need a grand jury investigation, a federal indictment, and a ridiculous trial alleging some grand conspiracy? All over a $6,000 donation? A complete waste of time.bigtrial.nethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12188557653424544411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-87180467184954982262017-01-25T20:57:14.010-05:002017-01-25T20:57:14.010-05:00Ralph,
You share a sentiment that many others hav...Ralph,<br /><br />You share a sentiment that many others have about this case. However, let me make two points. <br /><br />First, while the outcome of the daughter going to school may appear laudable, it was still accomplished on a donor's dime without their permission. Donors give to candidates for relatively specific purposes. Donors are aware that prosecutions over conversion of campaign funds are common enough to encourage proper reporting and proper use of funds, and donors have an expectation, for example, that a donation is not being used for personal enrichment. <br /><br />Particularly if I was a donor of limited means, I'd be pretty upset to hear that the Senator was using my donations to send someone's kid to school. Politicians should not be using their campaigns as a way to crowd-source educations for the inside crowd. <br /><br />Donors of limited means are still entitled to use their hard-earned funds for political speech purposes. It would be a great disservice if small-time donors were left out of the political process, simply because they feared they were forwarding someone else's child's education at the expense of their own. That conversion, even for a relatively benign outcome, necessarily must be a crime. <br /><br />Second, I would commend the prosecution for making this such a quick case. That's an improvement over the kitchen-sink cases that run for six weeks. Win or lose, at least they got straight to the point. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com