Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** LIVE *** Session coverage
Next Post: The consequences of leadership
Posted in:
* Prosecutors are asking that former state Rep. Derrick Smith (D-Chicago) be sentenced to four to five years in prison for accepting a $7,000 cash bribe. He’ll be sentenced today…
Prosecutor Marsha McClellan argued in court papers filed ahead of Thursday’s sentencing that Smith’s “steadfast refusal to accept responsibility, no doubt contributes to the erosion of the public’s trust in its elected officials.”
But Smith’s attorney Vic Henderson urged U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman not to compare “Smith’s conduct to that of other Illinois politicians, such as Governor Ryan and Governor Blagojevich,” citing the small sum of cash involved and adding, “Derrick Smith did not orchestrate the incident leading up to his indictment.
“The situation was created by the government.”
Given Smith’s ongoing denial of guilt, he is unlikely to offer a full-throated apology on Thursday, though Henderson said Smith is “is remorseful for bringing himself and his family shame as a result of his arrest and conviction.”
In other words, he’s ashamed that he got caught.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 9:21 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** LIVE *** Session coverage
Next Post: The consequences of leadership
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I doubt Smith will get 4 years, no way 5 years…
Wouldn’t surprise me if it’s 28-30 months, which woukd be 23-25 months (2 years) under the 85% rule.
By not showing full remorse, this is probably the best Smith can expect(?)
“You take the money, someone has to go away for it”
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 9:28 am
Ya never know. the judge is Sharon Johnson Coleman.
Comment by Amalia Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 9:35 am
Victor Henderson is also busy defending Jackie Robinson West. He was interviewed on local radio and tap danced about whether or not the team violated the rules.
Comment by Under Further Review Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 9:37 am
Seven grand.
I wouldn’t doctor an expense report for seven grand.
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 9:40 am
Real corruption busting prosecution here–not. Just shows if you wave some money around, you can find someone dumb enough to take it
Comment by Langhorne Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 9:45 am
My guess would be about 18 months. It’s true the amount of money isn’t huge, and it’s true he was baited into this particular bribe rather than instigating it himself. It’s also true, he’s remorseful only because he got caught. They may have been helpful catching him before he took much bigger sums. But he’s too delusional to think this way.
I’d say any sentence would end any public service career, but in this case, the dude was re-elected despite being expelled and having stink all over him.
Now, I think the judge will give him enough time to keep him out of a cushier prison with a split rail fence. I’m guessing she wants him to learn a lesson beyond his arrogance without being overly punitive. We’ll know soon.
Comment by A guy Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 9:45 am
What purpose does sending him to prison serve? It’ll cost the feds about $25K per year to lock him up. The prosecutors have their scalp for the trophy case. Nobody wins by sending him to prison.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 10:34 am
Smith’s an idiot (why he was targeted), but he was the smallest of small fish. The federales went after him like the Orca in “Jaws.” Waste of resources.
Meanwhile, down in the Central District, they’re on Cat, according to yesterday’s WSJ. The story implies the investigation is into all that alleged razzle dazzle tax evasion through the Swiss shell company the Cat accountant blew the whistle on a few years back.
Now that’s some real money; about $2.4 billion in tax evasion, a Senate committee estimated last year.
Comment by Wordslinger Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 10:57 am
Will the verdict be read in open court or will they just leave it in the envelope?
Comment by Jocko Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 10:57 am
@47th Ward I agree! And is not like he will ever be elected to anything ever again, So he has zero chance to do this again.
Comment by DJ Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 10:57 am
===DJ - Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 10:57 am:
@47th Ward I agree! And is not like he will ever be elected to anything ever again, So he has zero chance to do this again.===
Sigh…And yet he was.
Comment by A guy Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 11:27 am
Immorality is often incredibly stupid. The fact that he did it doesn’t make him stupid - the fact that he did it means he is just immoral. Sentencing him to jail is what we do for people in public office committing immoral acts.
Lock him up.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 11:28 am
Vanilla Man: I disagree with part of your comment. The fact that he did it for a mere $7k makes him stupid.
Comment by One of the 35 Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 11:43 am
I would rather the FBI & USANID spend more energy on crimes that diminished the services the taxpayers & citizens receive.
The case against Smith–not someone I ever liked–was too close to entrapment and criminalizing the kind of stuff that’s legal for pols who are also lawyers.
Many of the shenanigans in Proviso Township High Schools District 209 were much more harmful to people, deleterious to the performance of the school and involved more money.
But apparently, convicting Black & brown aldermen, county board members and state legislators is more appealing to the top-of-my-class lawyers working at DOJ than sorting out malfeasance at school districts.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 11:46 am
Can Derrick Smith plead guilty to stupidity while keeping his appeals options open (based on entrapment and First Amendment)?
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 11:51 am
“The fact that he did it for a mere $7k makes him stupid.”
Exactly.
When simple morality didn’t stop him, a cost-benefit analysis should have.
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 12:29 pm
He should get the maximum allowed by law. Blago got handed the reality of his crimes. So did Ryan. $7K or $7 million, doesn’t matter. Each represents the same diminishement of value and utter dishonesty and contempt for the taxpayers and continues to fuel distrust in our elected officials. Throw the book at him.
Comment by northernwatersports Thursday, Feb 19, 15 @ 12:49 pm
Wow - some of you law and order types have no sense of priorities. I’d really rather the FBI work on counter terrorism. But that’s just me. You want the G to spend $100,000 on salaries and field work to prosecute a guy for taking $7,000?
A better approach would have been to have a confidential talk with him. The agents telling him what they had, he messed up. He wouldn’t keep the money of course. The message would be delivered and that would be that.
Word would spread. You don’t need a public trial to get a message across.
Comment by low level Friday, Feb 20, 15 @ 5:58 am
It is a matter of perspective and ethics.
The Governor of Oregon resigned recently due to a conflict of interest controversy relating to his significant other.
An Illinois college classmate opined that such a scandal would not have rated in Illinois. Which state is better? Illinois or Oregon?
Comment by Under Further Review Friday, Feb 20, 15 @ 11:53 am