Verdict Is In: Former Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno Found Guilty on Two Felony Counts
Posted By Vicki McClure Davidson on December 7, 2009
Former Senate majority leader Joseph Bruno has been found guilty on two felony charges | Photo credit: Pennink/AP
The verdict is in… former NY Republican Senate majority leader Joseph Bruno has been found guilty today on two felony corruption charges. I know that left-wing bloggers will be going nuts over this, while always, faithfully, hypocritically remaining fairly mute whenever a Democrat is found guilty of corruption or lawlessness.
I prefer to be blind to party affiliation when corruption is uncovered and proven. Wrong is wrong, whether there is a “D” or an “R” following someone’s name on an election ballot. Bruno knew full well that what he was doing was illegal and wrong. No sympathies here that he got caught and found guilty.
From New York Times, Bruno, Former Albany Leader, Convicted of Corruption:
Joseph L. Bruno, the former Senate majority leader, was found guilty Monday afternoon of using his public office to earn hundreds of thousands of dollars in deals he failed to disclose with a business executive whose companies had interests before the state Legislature.
After seven days of deliberating, the jury in Mr. Bruno’s federal corruption trial handed down a guilty verdict on two felony counts. They found Mr. Bruno not guilty on five counts and could not reach a verdict on another count.
Mr. Bruno, 80, who was once the top Republican in New York and one of the state’s most powerful politicians, faces up to 20 years and a $250,000 fine on each felony count. He is sure to appeal, and the Supreme Court is preparing to review the controversial “theft of honest services” statute underlying his case.
“I am very, very disappointed in the verdict,” Mr. Bruno said afterwards from the courthouse steps. “The legal process is going to continue. In my mind and in my heart, it is not over until it’s over. And I think it’s far from over. Thank you all, have a good night and merry Christmas.”
His remarks were uncharacteristically short, lasting 18 seconds. A clearly dejected Mr. Bruno, a former boxer known for rarely backing down from a fight, stood in the bitter cold and he only showed some signs of life when a young woman yelled out “I love you, Joe!” as he was walking towards a waiting car. “Thank you very much,” he replied, as another young woman yelled “love you!” A couple dozen reporters and photographers clustered around him. He was guided through the throng by his son Kenneth and his handler, Kris Thompson.
[...]
Prosecutors also contended that Mr. Bruno used his Senate power to benefit an array of other businesses, including an Albany-area technology company that paid him hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees and a contracting company owned by an old friend, who employed him as a management consultant.
Mr. Bruno did not take the stand in his own defense, instead deploying only seven witnesses, including friends and former business associates, to bolster his case. Characterizing Mr. Bruno as a victim of overzealous prosecutors, his lawyers portrayed him as a devoted public servant who tried to faithfully adhere to the law, routinely seeking the advice of Senate ethics lawyers.
From Politics on the Hudson, Bonacic On Bruno: “I Feel Neither Vindication Nor Satisfaction”:
Sen. John Bonacic, R-Mount Hope, Orange County, was the first senator to call for Bruno to step down as majority leader in 2006 after Bruno revealed he was being investigated by the FBI, angering his GOP colleagues.
But Bonacic said “I feel neither vindication nor satisfaction” in the guilty verdict against Bruno.
“I said in 2006, and believe today, that Senator Bruno was not qualified to lead our Senate Republican conference given that he was the subject of an FBI investigation,” Bonacic said in a statement.
“Today’s conviction affirms that position as a matter of law. It is a clarion call for stronger, non-partisan ethics laws and enforcement.”
“Senator Bruno’s case will undoubtedly be considered by higher courts. Regardless of any outcome, public officials owe it to their constituents to act under a higher standard. Merely avoiding indictment is not an acceptable standard for holding public office. With this conviction, more people who hold public office, should finally understand that.”
About the author
Comments