Sorich fallout
Wednesday, Apr 16, 2008 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Both myself and the Sun-Times called the appellate court’s denial of Bob Sorich’s appeal a “green light” for prosecutors this morning. Background from the Tribune…
After winning the convictions in the Sorich trial, prosecutors promised that they would continue their investigation of City Hall corruption.
But the only high-ranking Daley administration official to face charges since has been former Streets and Sanitation Commissioner Al Sanchez, accused last year of arranging jobs for members of the pro-Daley Hispanic Democratic Organization. And no charges have come yet from investigations into hiring at Cook County and in the Blagojevich administration.
“The presumption of people in politics has been that a lot of other things were waiting on this decision,” said Cook County Commissioner Mike Quigley (D-Chicago). “It backed up a very important tool to ferret out corruption.”
* The Sun-Times scored a former federal prosecutor for its explanation…
“In my opinion, the decision that came down today blessed the aggressive posture that the U.S. Attorney’s office has taken in corruption cases,” he said. “A contrary decision would have had a chilling effect on the future cases considered by the U.S. Attorney’s office.”
Prosecutors were fearful — and defense attorneys hopeful — that the court might throw out the convictions based on a decision last year tossing out a conviction of an aide to the governor of Wisconsin.
“The court went out of its way to distinguish the Sorich case from [the Wisconsin case],” Collins said. “It focused on the massive and systemic nature of the scheme, compared to the sporadic and episodic corruption in [Wisconsin.]”
That case (US vs. Thompson) has been bandied about for months as a possible saving grace not only for Sorich but for everybody else who hasn’t been zapped yet.
* Sun-Times…
The ruling sent waves of angst through City Hall, Gov. Blagojevich’s office and other government offices […]
“I’m sure there are certain people now who are concerned,” a Blagojevich loyalist told the Sun-Times.
I’m sure, too.
* AP…
Tuesday’s ruling means the 43-year-old Sorich has 72 hours to report to prison, according to his attorney, Thomas Anthony Durkin. Prosecutors said a federal judge would hear their motion to revoke the bond Thursday.
But Durkin noted he would continue the appeal process, all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.
Good luck with that one.
* NBC 5…
“It is important to remember that the city has moved forward and upward on many fronts since the events in question,” said Daley. “We are operating in close cooperation with the court appointed monitor in all hiring.”.
Hilarious.
* Also, a reminder that a Con-Con can do some good…
Shakman filed the suit after he was beaten in a race for delegate to the 1970 Illinois Constitutional Convention. He blamed the help his opponent got from a horde of precinct captains and other doorbell ringing campaign workers who had jobs on the city payroll.
- Silly Verdict - Wednesday, Apr 16, 08 @ 8:58 am:
Shakman lost in the Con-Con because he was a white guys running against two African-Americans in an African American district. Patronage had nothing to do with it.
The feds, Inspector General and Noelle Brennan are just looking for ways to justify their existence and paychecks.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Apr 16, 08 @ 9:29 am:
Four years is a long time for a family man, stand up guy or not. I trust his attorney is exploring some options.
- IrishPirate - Wednesday, Apr 16, 08 @ 9:42 am:
I foresee possible Presidential Pardons for “dese guys” after the November election and prior to January 20th.
Bush and Daley seem to get along quite well and I’m sure Bush has no love for Paddy Fitzgerald and his gang of crimebusters.
If it’s good enough for Scooter, I would guess he will be receiving a present too, it’s good enough for the “Daley Gang”.
- Judgment Day Is On The Way... - Wednesday, Apr 16, 08 @ 9:43 am:
Cook County, and the Forest Preserve are going to be right on up there. Bet those AUSA’s have already scheduled more time before the Grand Juries to present evidence.
- Captain America - Wednesday, Apr 16, 08 @ 9:56 am:
Gee whiz! What a shock to the powers that be in Chicago, Cook County, and Illinois. Honest service is a legal requirement in jurisdictions where little has been on the square since time immemorial.
I find it difficult to believe that anyone could keep a straight face when arguing that fraudulent schemes,destroying evidence, and lying to the FBI should not be considered crimes.
An appeal will be a waste of time and money since it is clear that the pawns convicted were guilty of the acts they committed and that these acts were criminal.
Particularly “darning” was the court’s remark that it is hard to take the defense arguments “too seriously.”
Nonetheless, one can feel some sympathy for the pawns/buffers who were convicted for carrying out the wishes of the Mayor and the other power brokers.
- chiatty - Wednesday, Apr 16, 08 @ 10:35 am:
This just goes to show that political figures can be indicted and convicted of just about anything, including just doing their job.
- Leigh - Wednesday, Apr 16, 08 @ 10:38 am:
Just doing there job……please. Just because corruption is a tradition in Illinois doesn’t make it right.
- Garp - Wednesday, Apr 16, 08 @ 10:54 am:
When Sorich and the boys took these jobs they were well aware of what they were getting into. It is a shame they could not just tell the truth instead of taking the fall for their bosses, however, that was not the bargain.
Of course, the bosses could have been stand up guys and and taken the blame instead of letting them swing.
Yea right, sometimes I crack myself up.
- Anon - Wednesday, Apr 16, 08 @ 11:32 am:
If the prosecutor is obliged to choose his cases, it follows that he can choose his defendants. Therein is the most dangerous power of the prosecutor: that he will pick people that he thinks he should get, rather than pick cases that need to be prosecuted. With the law books filled with a great assortment of crimes, a prosecutor stands a fair chance of finding at least a technical violation of some act on the part of almost anyone. In such a case, it is not a question of discovering the commission of a crime and then looking for the man who has committed it, it is a question of picking the man and then searching the law books, or putting investigators to work, to pin some offense on him. It is in this realm—in which the prosecutor picks some person whom he dislikes or desires to embarrass, or selects some group of unpopular persons and then looks for an offense, that the greatest danger of abuse of prosecuting power lies. It is here that law enforcement becomes personal, and the real crime becomes that of being unpopular with the predominant or governing group, being attached to the wrong political views, or being personally obnoxious to or in the way of the prosecutor himself.
Robert Jackson, Attorney General of the United States, April 1, 1940
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Apr 16, 08 @ 11:59 am:
Anon, Justice Jackson’s comments cut both ways.
I think Peter Fitzgerald would argue that a previous long line of U.S. attorney’s were so inextricably intertwined with the ruling Illinois business/political establishment that that it was not in their personal interests to pursue corruption to the highest levels. They contented themselves with knocking over silly aldermen who were dumb enough to take small cash payoffs from people they didn’t know (”look directly at the picture on the wall and speak into the potted plant as I hand you the money.”)
That’s why he recommended the out-of-towner, Fitzgerald, to Bush. The story I’ve heard is that Hastert raised holy hell with Karl Rove, who called his former client, Peter Fitzgerald, to tell him the recommendation had to be someone from Illinois cleared by Hastert. Peter Fitzgerald did an end-around and buttonholed Bush on Air Force One during a visit to Illinois and got him to sign off on Pat Fitzgerald.
- Anon - Wednesday, Apr 16, 08 @ 12:58 pm:
The Decree does not inhibit anyone’s voluntary political activities, but rather the judgment simply provides that, for non-exempt jobs, a person’s lawful political activity, or lack of such activity, is to have nothing to do with getting or keeping a job. Neither does the Decree impose a civil service system as defendants contend. See Judgment Order dated April 4, 1983, at 2 (“The Judgment goes no further than to attempt to eliminate political considerations in the hiring of government employees. It does not impose a civil service system nor does it necessitate that a merit system be utilized.”) Second, defendants’ argument that the Decree improperly excludes party leaders from any role in the hiring process is without merit. Although the Decree does prohibit the existing system by which hiring decisions are delegated to ward and township committeemen, the Decree does not prohibit party leaders from disseminating public information concerning job openings, referring people to employment offices of the defendants, or even from recommending persons about whom they have specific job related information. The Decree simply prohibits hiring which gives political recommendations more weight than other relevant recommendations (including recommendations of rival political groups).
Shakman v. Democratic Organization of Cook County 607 F.Supp. 1086 (N.D. Ill.1985).
So when prosecutors treat political activity as a disqualifier for government employment are they violating the Shakman decree? And are they, in turn, then guilty of their new crime?
- Objective Dem - Wednesday, Apr 16, 08 @ 1:08 pm:
I think part of the cynicism is based on the fact that at least two of our past US Attorneys, Gov. Kerner and Gov. Thompson, were so politically motivated but ultimately corrupt.
I know Thompson has never been charged with anything, but his history of accepting gold and antiques as gifts, deals with Cellini, and the abuse of patronage, allow me to legitimately classify him as corrupt in my book.
I don’t think our current US Attorney is of the same character, but we all have been burned too many times that a little suspicion is natural.
And don’t forget Spitzer.
- Bubs - Wednesday, Apr 16, 08 @ 2:31 pm:
The Machine loyalists want to use the verdict as a club to beat up the Shakman Decrees. But these guys were not convicted of violating the Shakman Decrees, which would, since the decrees are civil consent judgements, be a matter of contempt of court, not mail fraud.
Sorich and two other defendants were were convicted of mail fraud for what the Court of Appeals called “a massive scheme to defraud, complete with specific intent and material misrepresentations.” They would be just as guilty of the crime if the Shakman Decrees did not exist.
Speaking of contempt, I’m only sorry that Sorich gets three whole days to enjoy before it’s “over the river and through the woods to to federal prison we go.” Let him sit there, let his wife and children face life without him for at least three years, and then let him decide if he will still remain silent about the people above him in the scheme, the most guilty of all.
If he won’t talk, then let him rot.