Bribe Not Big Enough
- An appeals court has reversed the bribery conviction of a Chicago zoning
inspector on grounds the value of two $600 payoffs he received weren't
high enough.
The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago issued the ruling Thursday.
Dominick Owens was arrested in 2009 for allegedly accepting $1,200 to issue certificates permitting owners to occupy their homes after construction. He allegedly issued them without inspections.
His 2011 conviction stemmed from an investigation of inspectors dubbed “Operation Crooked Code.” It led to more than a dozen arrests.
An FBI affidavit said Owens accepted thousands of dollars from a cooperating witness.
But the court found prosecutors failed to prove the value of the bribes was $5,000 or more as required under the law used to convict Owens.
OK, we understand the statute may have been misapplied, but "the bribe wasn't big enough" is going to lead to all sorts of confusion.
Labels: silly people
posted by SCC at 12:02 AM
30 Comments:
I see many new bribes being accepted at $4999.99!
So I can go back to doing $1200 traffic stops?
WTF!
Who wrote this legislation?
What about Cellini essentially walking away scott free?
What really happened?
More to this story!
What kind of legal precedent will this set?
So, if one of us take a bribe for under 600 we are ok? Awesome!
No scc...its confruuusion....not confusion...as in hees bees keepin up all kinds of confuuusion!
Say what you will but wasting federal resources on a low level bribery case is a waste. As soon as the FBI makes us safe from all terrorists, wall street thieves, white collar scam artists then you can focus on low level termites.
Dont worry the guy spent at least $ 50,000 on his defense and appeal. All for a $1200 bribe. I hope it was worth it.
Me work for Tribune. Me think money not too high for bribe. (insert caveman voice)
Do you want the $20 pen or the $15 pencil?
This is kinda like being a little bit pregnant.
Dang! Time to appeal my tow truck scandal case. Woohoo!
But will he get his job back? No conviction, no firing?
When in elephant country, Hunt elephant!
didn't they fire an old timer in 014 for taking a bag of sunflower seeds at a walgreens....
amazing that it got that far before someone realized that the amount of the bribe did not meet the threshold of the law.
Neither the court nor the law is saying that accepting a bribe under $5k is okay. The court is saying that a law that most likely set more severe penalties for large bribes was used here.
In other words, the prosecutor's office (Anita's people or the feds, not sure) fucked this up by charging the guy under the wrong law.
So is that a green light for us to go back to, "You were doing $20 over the speed limit, sir."? That' not a lot either. And it keeps court costs down too.
So I can go back to doing $1200 traffic stops?
Nah, stick with the double sawbuck, and you will never get a beef!
Tossed because the bribe was too small...yup, this is definitely Illinois.
No, it was exactly right. This is just the machine letting the little people know what is expected of them. IOW, the bribes need to go up. Inflation, you know.
Would of been nice if they would also have said the strikes Cozzi gave weren't severe enough to merit five years in federal prison. Equal protection under the law my ass!
Does it parallel the idea of petit v. grand larceny? The seriousness of the charge being based on the dollar amount stolen?
could this man be x relative of richie or a friend of a friend? if we could have the same deal forget a raise. this city is not ready for reform, patty bauler.
The dollar loophole,what a joke!
You said that we should be reaching out more to the community tho.
This week on Dancing With the Gold Stars and Three Bars.
Ballerina goes on corporate campaign fund raising shakedown tour.
Crime is down. Don't you see the bodies falling?
dn't they fire an old timer in 014 for taking a bag of sunflower seeds at a walgreens.... 10/12/2012 07:58:00 AM
As well they should of. Old timer made enough money to pay for those sunflower seeds.
18 U.S.C. § 666 - Theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds. This statute has the $5000 requirement. However, the judge misinterpreted the law. The $5000 requirement does not mean he had to take $5000 or more, it means that the overall transaction was worth $5000 or more. In other words, if the inspector got $1200, but the transaction he allowed to occur was worth more than $5000, this statute would apply.
In other words, stay honest or you might just end up in prison with a really dumb look on your face.
Post a Comment
<< Home