TENNESSEE STATE SENATOR CHARGED WITH THEFT OF GOVERNMENT FUNDS

According to various news reports, earlier this week, Tennessee State Senator Katrina Robinson was indicted by a federal grand jury for allegedly embezzling $600,000 in federal funds from a healthcare institute she operated.  According to a criminal complaint filed by a Memphis U.S. Attorney, Ms. Robinson improperly spent federal funds on numerous personal things, including a wedding, a divorce, and a vacation.

As a former federal prosecutor in Augusta, Georgia, I once handled many prosecutions like this one involving embezzlement of government funds.  One oddity I would note about this case is that, generally, when I prosecuted, I didn't first obtain a complaint and then indict.  I simply obtained an indictment.  In this case, it appears the prosecutor filed a complaint first, and then obtained an indictment.  Was this done in order to get juicy details about the facts of the case out into the public arena?  Maybe not.

Of course, every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

A Goolsby "War Story:" More Examples of Kickbacks in Fraud Cases

[Stacks of Cash Depiction from wikipedia]

Recently, I started a series of posts in which I describe examples of kickbacks which were paid in major fraud cases I saw as a former federal prosecutor. Currently, I am a criminal defense lawyer in Augusta, Georgia, where I practice law with my sons, but I handled a number of significant white collar criminal cases as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for over 20 years.

In one major "honest services" mail fraud case, the defendant construction company paid a total of $2.7 million in kickback payments to an employee of another company, in exchange for being awarded profitable construction contracts by the other company's employee. One of the many kickbacks, or rewards, paid in this case included a total of $13,945.00 paid to two dating services, (for the employee's benefit and enjoyment), including one dating service located in Atlanta and another one located in San Diego. In addition, the defendant construction company actually paid for the (other company's) employee's travel costs to fly around the country to date all the women he met through the dating services!

Now, you must admit, while fraud is wrong, those are nice kickbacks!

Search Warrants v. Subpoenas: Practical Considerations on Which Method the Feds Will Use

[Photo from southeastsun.com]

According to various news reports, earlier today, state and federal law enforcement officials executed a search warrant at a social services (DFACS) office in Columbus, Georgia. According to the reports, the agents were looking for evidence pertaining to an investigation of DFACS employees for allegedly falsifying records to obtain federal funding. It struck me as a little bit odd that government agents were doing a raid on a government office.

But the facts of that investigation really are not the point I wanted to make here. Instead, I want to discuss in this post some of the practical reasons why the feds sometimes select search warrants, as opposed to utilizing grand jury subpoenas, or some other method, to obtain evidence of a crime.

As a former federal prosecutor for over 20 years, (currently, I am an Augusta, Georgia criminal defense lawyer), I often had to advise or plan with federal agents about which evidence-gathering method to use. A common reason to utilize a search warrant, (instead of a subpoena), is if you are afraid that the "bad guys," or targets of the investigation, will engage in a "shredding party," if you tip them off, or that you may give them time otherwise to remove or destroy incriminating records.

But, trust me, there are also some practical reasons NOT to use a search warrant! For instance, if you go in with a search warrant, you may be required to seize everything!  This can amount to millions of pages of documents that you are then going to have to inventory, store, and actually read! On the other hand, if you use a subpoena, you can make a rifle shot request for a relatively few, selected documents and avoid all the trouble and mess of a search warrant!

Another problem with utilizing a search warrant involves the serious disruption it causes to what may be otherwise be a legitimate office or business.

Every white collar crime investigation is different! And that is what made it exciting to be a federal prosecutor! These are just a few of the practical reasons why one evidence-gathering method may be chosen over another. What do you think?

DOJ Strikes Out at Second Roger Clemens Trial

[Photo of Roger Clemens from wikipedia]

It appears that, following the not guilty verdict in the John Edwards trial, the Department of Justice has struck out yet again in another high profile criminal trial. This time, it is the Roger Clemens trial. 

Today, various news reports indicate that Clemens, the former professional baseball pitcher, has been found not guilty on all counts by a federal jury in Washington.  As you will recall, Clemens was charged with allegedly lying to Congress in 2008 about his alleged lack of steroid use while a pitcher. You may also recall that an earlier trial of Clemens, last year, ended in a mistrial, after government prosecutors offered inadmissible testimony.

Now, following two trials, and following the expenditure of millions in taxpayers' dollars, another high profile defendant has been acquitted.  As a former federal prosecutor, and, currently, as an Augusta, Georgia criminal defense lawyer, I don't know exactly where the government went wrong, but it surely is a shame to see such a waste of scarce tax dollars on criminal cases which probably should never have been brought in the first place! Don't you agree?

A Prediction About the Verdict in the John Edwards Criminal Trial

[Photo of John Edwards from wikipedia]

As the trial of former Senator John Edwards actually begins tomorrow in a Greensboro, North Carolina federal courtroom, I just wanted to remind you of my prediction about his fate, last year, shortly after Edwards was indicted on six federal felony charges.  You will recall that the criminal charges involve his alleged concealment of over a million dollars in campaign contributions which went toward covering up his affair with Rielle Hunter.  My prediction was here.

I still stand by my prediction!  But will I be right!?  In other words, laying aside whatever you might think of Edwards, personally, what do you think a jury will do in this criminal case?

As a former federal prosecutor for over 20 years and, currently, as an Augusta, Georgia criminal defense lawyer, I maintain that, generally, the best defense in a criminal case is to essentially admit the act, but deny the intent, or guilty knowledge.  It will be interesting to see if a variation of this defense works in this case.

What do you think?