By Dave Lucas
http://stream.publicbroadcasting.net/production/mp3/wamc/local-wamc-875148.mp3
Albany, NY – The Joe Bruno Corruption trial dominated the headlines for weeks, and the eventual outcome could hinge on a federal law that could be overturned before Bruno is sentenced... Capital District Bureau Chief Dave Lucas reports.
Bill Paricak co-prosecuted the Bruno case with Elizabeth Coombe - the two attorneys were in Washington Tuesday for oral arguments regarding the key law that helped arrest Illinois ex-Gov. Rod Blagojevich and Former New York Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno - a law that has been used by prosecutors to convict politicians, lobbyists and corporate executives of fraud. Paricak could not go on mic, but stated that the in the eyes of the US Department of Justice "Honest Services" codifies a particular theory of prosecution that the Federal Courts had accepted over the course of many years involving a fiduciary with a conflict of interest.
The law appears to be in danger of being struck down entirely, or scaled back to cover only kickbacks and bribes. Throughout two hours of arguments, the justices took turns suggesting the law is too vague and open-ended and fails to spell out what is a crime.
In June, Former Massachusetts House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi and three friends were indicted by a federal grand jury for allegedly orchestrating a scheme that allowed DiMasi to pocket tens of thousands of dollars in payments from the Burlington software firm Cognos while he was using his powerful office to make sure the company won state contracts.
Last month DiMasi's attorneys asked a federal judge to throw out the corruption charges, arguing that state law allows lawmakers to share legal fees an associate gets in connection with state contracts. U.S. District Court Judge Mark Wolf has scheduled hearings in March on the motion to dismiss the charges. The DiMasi case argument reminds one of Bruno's contention that he "did nothing wrong." Bruno will receive his sentence in the spring.
The tab is still being added up in the Bruno case. The Massachusetts state House of Representatives has paid private attorneys nearly $378,000 in taxpayer money to represent the speaker's office in the DiMasi case. Some lawmakers, both publicly and privately, have questioned whether so much should be spent on legal fees as budgets throughout state government are being slashed and staffers laid off.