Joe Bruno

"Now in the Private Sector, Bruno Is Selling Efficiency and Openness"

Mon, 01 Dec 2008 00:00:00 GMT

Joseph L. Bruno, New York's newest and perhaps most unlikely champion of government transparency, is searching for the right words.

"Sunlight, I guess?" Mr. Bruno said, trying to recall the name of a state Web site that publishes lobbying and campaign finance records. "Daylight, or something?"

Second acts are never easy. But Mr. Bruno, who resigned from the State Senate in July after a career as one of New York's most powerful and memorable public figures, has chosen an especially challenging new role.

Over the nearly 14 years he served as Senate majority leader, Mr. Bruno became to some critics one of the symbols of Albany's secrecy, inefficiency and profligacy. Now, as the chief executive of CMA Consulting Services, an information technology and software firm based just outside Albany, Mr. Bruno is preaching the virtues of smaller, leaner, more accountable government. (The aforementioned Web site, by the way, is called Project Sunlight.)

Where Mr. Bruno once steered hundreds of millions of dollars in economic development money to his suburban Albany district, he now pitches municipal agencies on how to save money by switching to paperless payroll systems.

The man who went to court rather than reveal details of the Senate's pork-barrel spending now speaks proudly of his company's role in designing a program for the state comptroller that allows reporters or the public to examine any contract between a state agency and a vendor.

And Mr. Bruno, who once did most of his deal-making in secret as one of Albany's "three men in a room" - along with Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and a succession of governors - now spends much of his time hobnobbing at meetings and conferences in Texas, Arizona and other places. He hopes to double CMA's business over the next two years, in part by promoting the company's products to cash-strapped state officials nationwide.

"I feel like technology is a place that governments at all levels are going to have to look at for relief, to create efficiencies that they want and need, to create the service that people demand these days, to be responsive and to do it in a cost-effective way," Mr. Bruno, 79, said in an hourlong interview recently at a publicist's office in Manhattan.

"You people can have some fun with that," Mr. Bruno added gamely, referring to the press. "But I've always really been kind of on the leading edge of being open."

As Mr. Bruno pursues his new career, however, the vestiges of his old one still loom. In recent weeks, a grand jury heard additional testimony in a two-year-old federal investigation into outside business dealings Mr. Bruno had while serving as senator, according to two lawyers involved in the case.

Since late October, Mr. Bruno has spent at least $24,999 from his campaign account to pay legal bills, according to the State Board of Elections. Federal prosecutors began the inquiry by looking into earmarks and economic development grants arranged by Mr. Bruno. Over the summer, it expanded to examine investments made by some unions with business before the Legislature in a private fund that employed Mr. Bruno. The lawyers involved in the case predict a conclusion by the end of the year, though no one seems sure what that would mean for Mr. Bruno - least of all Mr. Bruno himself.

"I personally haven't heard from them," Mr. Bruno said, referring to federal investigators. "My take is that they're looking to see if they think anything was done wrong. I've never been charged, never even been told that I was a target, by anybody. So I am doing my thing, making what contribution I can to the health and welfare of myself and the business community here."

The office of the United States attorney for the Northern District of New York, which is conducting the investigation, declined comment. Since resigning his Senate seat in July, Mr. Bruno has largely withdrawn from daily politics. He has begun to empty out his campaign account with checks to old Senate colleagues and local Republican organizations and has turned down most requests to appear at political events. Former colleagues said he calls occasionally to catch up, but has resisted the role of Republican elder statesman. For some time after leaving the Senate, Mr. Bruno said, he did not even speak with his successor as majority leader, Dean G. Skelos, Republican from Long Island.

"I made up my mind, once I was out, that I wasn't going to try to be looking over anyone's shoulders, I wasn't going to be Monday morning quarterbacking," Mr. Bruno said.

His passions now, Mr. Bruno says, are his business, his family and his horses, which he tends to every day on his farm in Brunswick, N.Y. Mr. Bruno has largely escaped the grind of political life, friends say - not to mention blame for his party's loss of the Senate in November and the dismal possibilities of life in the minority there.

"You can almost feel in his voice a load off his shoulders," said Jasper Nolan, the longtime Republican chairman in Saratoga County.

But leaving the Capitol has not meant leaving the public sector behind. On the contrary: Although Mr. Bruno says he hopes most of the firm's expansion will be in the private sector, the vast majority of CMA's revenue comes from government contracts. Indeed, the firm expects that Mr. Bruno's vast experience in government will be a selling point to potential new clients.

"It's helping me a great deal, having been there, on the inside, and now being on the outside," Mr. Bruno said.

With 410 employees and $42 million in annual revenues, CMA was a thriving and respected business even before Mr. Bruno was recruited. (The outgoing president, Kay McCabe Stafford, is the widow of Ronald Stafford, a former Republican senator who was a friend and colleague of Mr. Bruno's.) In Texas, for example, the firm designed a system for the state's child welfare agency that tracks case workers with global-positioning devices and allows them to file reports using handheld equipment. In Arizona and a dozen other states, CMA runs food-stamp programs, using automated software to track what mix of foods are being purchased by people receiving aid.

But close to half of the company's public-sector business is in New York, and includes state and city agencies. The firm has three dozen contracts with state agencies totaling about $30 million, according to state records. Five of those contracts, worth about $1.4 million, were awarded in October, though Mr. Bruno said those were largely negotiated before he joined the firm.

Mr. Bruno has already registered as a lobbyist in New York. And though state law prohibits him from lobbying his former Senate colleagues for the next two years, he is free to lobby members of the executive branch. He remains close friends with Gov. David A. Paterson, a relationship that, combined with his stature as a former majority leader, could potentially pay enormous dividends for CMA.

The governor attended a barbecue at Mr. Bruno's home over the Fourth of July holiday and speaks roughly every other week with the former senator, according to both men.

"David Paterson has been absolutely terrific to me," Mr. Bruno said.

Well after leaving office, Mr. Bruno remained active in negotiations to provide Advanced Micro Devices, a computer-chip manufacturer, with more than $1 billion in state aid to build a factory in Saratoga County, a project Mr. Bruno regards as part of his legacy.

"Most of his ideas are about bringing business to New York and bringing jobs to New York," Mr. Paterson said. "He's arranged for me to meet some people who he thinks can be helpful."

Mr. Paterson said that the former senator had not asked him for any favors. But the two ignored suggestions from ethics groups last summer that they seek special guidance from the state's public integrity commission on how to manage Mr. Bruno's interactions with executive branch officials, given the governor's closeness to Mr. Bruno.

"Bruno wasn't some rank-and-file legislator," said Blair Horner, the legislative director for the New York Public Interest Research Group. "The bottom-line corporate reason is, they're hoping that he will fatten the bottom line, that his personal relationships will help them to keep and expand the amount of government contract work."

Indeed, some do not buy Mr. Bruno's new enthusiasm for transparent government or his claims that it is consistent with policies he advocated as senator.

Mr. Bruno, for example, was the first Senate leader to require the release of every internal expenditure made by the Senate.

But those reports are published only every six months, in a book format that makes it extremely difficult to examine the spending in any systematic way. (Asked about it, Mr. Bruno joked, "You noticed that, huh?")

Similarly, as majority leader, Mr. Bruno signed off on state budgets laden with what fiscal watchdogs call gimmicks, including the extensive use of private contractors that created the appearance of a shrinking state work force without the reality of shrinking spending.

Mr. Bruno acknowledged that some skepticism about his reinvention was probably inevitable, but added: "I hope when we get together in a year, I will be able to say I was responsible for a lot of good things."

High Profile Attorneys Back Bruno

Tue, 10 Mar 2009 00:00:00 GMT

'Lawyers for Bruno' assembles high-profile attorneys in support of ex-Senator

Comments 0 | Recommend 0

March 5, 2009 - 1:38 PM

CBS 6 News/AP

A group of high-profile�attorneys in the Capital District have coalesced to form "Lawyers for Bruno" in support of former state Senate Republican leader Joseph Bruno.

Bruno, who retired from the legislature in July of 2008,�is facing�federal charges for�"theft of honest services" --�a sweeping indictment accusing him of abusing his public position to enrich himself.

Bruno is accused of using his position to steer contracts and grants to businesses that paid him more than $3 million in consulting fees or other compensation from 1993 through 2006, and then covering his tracks.

A press release sent by the group Thursday�said the coalition was formed out of outrage by the charge: "'Theft of honest service' is the most porous use of language ever crafted," said co-chair E. Stewart Jones, Jr. "Based on its free fall application, even prosecutors across America who casually withhold evidence would be charged with this violation. No wonder legal scholars are looking at this disturbing use of the law."

The group is chaired by Stephen Coffey and�Jones, and�so far includes attorneys Michael Assaf, Jack Casey, Jim Crane, Harry Dagostino, Patricia DeAngelis, Marc Ehrlich, Andrew Martin and James Towne.

Bruno has pleaded not guilty to the charge. He has said�the investigation is a politically motivated "fishing expedition that smells really, really bad."�

"Janison: Statute's elasticity sparks debate"

Fri, 20 Feb 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Decrying his felony indictment, former State Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno accused law-enforcement officials last month of "contorting a federal statute" so they'd have something to show for years spent probing him.

Bruno faces prosecution on a federal statute that has been tested and challenged on and off for decades in U.S. courts - and still prompts controversy. It is known in short as "honest-services fraud."

Sure, you expect Bruno to say what he said, and you expect his lawyers to rebut the charges.

But as fights over federal authority go, this may be a good one to track.

The indictment says the state and its citizens "had an intangible right" to Bruno's "honest services" as an elected official - which the senator allegedly failed to fulfill in his private business dealings under a "scheme to defraud."

To support that, authorities cited Bruno's failure to disclose those dealings - involving, for example, funds controlled by union leaders with an interest in state legislation.

Lawyers for Bruno are moving to dismiss the charges. They call this case an unprecedented stretch of an already stretched statute. They insisted in phone interviews yesterday that the U.S. attorney is "federalizing" a state ethics violation, at worst a minor misdemeanor, into a major felony fraud case.

"It is scary," says Bruno attorney Abbe David Lowell, who's represented clients from President Bill Clinton to lobbyist Jack Abramoff. "It puts into jeopardy a lot of public officials who work on the outside of their public service." Defense lawyer E. Stewart Jones adds: "I am not aware of any other honest-services case that does not involve an underlying substantive crime."

Bruno was no more the reincarnation of Abraham Lincoln than his old antagonist Eliot Spitzer would sound like Mister Rogers in taped conversations with his hooker supplier.

Long before Spitzer's arrival, Bruno's murky blend of business and public dealings aroused suspicion. At the same time, "honest-services fraud" has struck some jurists as vague and elastic in its definition. In the 1980s, the courts even struck down the statute, but the Congress acted to revive it. Currently, it is central to several cases against big-time defendants:

Rod Blagojevich, recently forced out as Illinois governor, has been charged in an "honest services fraud" case in purportedly trying to sell the U.S. Senate seat vacated by President Barack Obama.

Queens Assemb. Anthony Seminerio was charged five months ago in connection with payments from a hospital and other entities to a "consulting" firm he created, allegedly using his public office to help them.

Former Queens Assemb. Brian McLaughlin, still due for sentencing on his guilty plea to a spree of white-collar thefts, was initially charged under the statute.

Federal prosecutors are considering "honest services fraud" as a weapon in their investigation of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles for the possible cover-up of sex abuse by priests, according to The Wall Street Journal.

For prosecutors, some experts say, "honest services fraud" can be as handy a tool as the very flexible charge of obstruction may be for a police officer. Seasoned New York City attorney Joshua Dratel calls it "part of an overcriminalization arsenal that federal prosecutors have."

We may soon find this law facing new court tests alongside its defendants.

Justice Dept Notified About Possible Intimidating FBI Tactics

Wed, 22 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Bruno to probers: 'Back off'

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

By James V. Franco
The Record

On the heels of his daughter and spokesman getting subpoenas, the attorneys representing former state Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno sent a letter to his prosecutors asking them to back off.

"In recent days, it has come to the attention that FBI agents associated with this case have engaged in tactics that are either aimed at intimidating our client and harassing his family and co-workers or are so insensitive to those impacts that it is hard to believe them to be benign," said the July 21 letter signed by Washington attorney Abbe David Lowell.�

The letter states that the FBI has issued a number of subpoenas in recent weeks but the one to his daughter, Catherine Bruno-Hines, and the one to his spokesman, Kris Thompson, particularly irked the Bruno camp.

The letter states earlier in the investigation Bruno-Hines was pressured into testifying to the grand jury by a surprising "early morning visit from agents seeking to compel her testimony." And that Thompson's subpoena was delivered a day after he lambasted prosecutors in the Daily News of New York.

When asked by the newspaper if Bruno's decision to pay for lawyers was an appropriate use of campaign money, Thompson replied it was when defending "an overzealous and out-of-control government prosecutor embarking on a political witch hunt."

"As if to prove Mr. Thompson's point, two FBI agents visited him the very next day, serving him with a subpoena and asking him questions for the first time in what has been a four-year investigation," the letter reads.

Sources said that the FBI served Thompson at his place of employment, CMA Consulting, in front of his co-workers because they claim they couldn't find him anywhere else, including his Malta home of more than a decade. Thompson worked with Bruno at the Senate and now in the private sector at CMA.

The subpoena requests any information Thompson may have, including notes and tape recordings, from an interview Bruno did with New York magazine in 2008. Bruno disputed some of what was reported and Thompson told media outlets at the time he had tape recordings to prove his boss' words were taken out of context or were said off the record.

The letter also states that it is premature to issue subpoenas since the trial is at least four months out, with a number of pre-trial motions to be decided - including the issues related to the constitutionality of the crime Bruno stands charged, theft of honest services.

It is unclear who else received a subpoena.

In January, Bruno was indicted on charges that he used his powerful position as majority leader of the state Senate to enrich himself by $3.2 million from businesses looking to do business with the state. Formally, he stands charged with eight counts of theft of honest services.

The letter was addressed to Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division Lanny Breuer and Acting U.S. Attorney Andrew T. Baxter. Neither could be reached for comment.��

James V. Franco can be reached at 270-1277 or by e-mail at jfranco@troyrecord.com.

Law Professor: Feds May Have Problems in Bruno Case

Wed, 25 Mar 2009 00:00:00 GMT

A trip to the outer limits

�

By JAMES M. ODATO
First published in print: Monday, March 23, 2009

Amid March madness, a team of attorneys - "Lawyers for Bruno" - announced a strategy to cast doubts about the criminal charges against former Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno.

�

The group asserted the case against the GOP icon - that he violated federal law by denying the public of honest services - is so weak it is not winnable by the prosecution. The group is being hyperbolic, an expert on the honest services statute says, but the case is going to be a challenge for the Department of Justice.

"The prosecutors are going after a case that is at the outer limits of honest services," said Peter Henning, a former federal attorney who now teaches at Wayne State Law School in Detroit. He has studied 200 honest services decisions, and the majority of them are wins for the prosecution. He is monitoring the Bruno case and may include it in a book he plans to publish on public corruption in a year. "It's a hard case to win, but it is winnable . . . Whether they can keep it on appeal is another matter."

The case is unusual, he said, because the federal attorneys are bashing the Senate ethics rules instead of alleging bribery, kickbacks or skimming. The case against the senator is more of a favoritism argument, he said.

If the Bruno supporters are putting on a full-court press to force the next U.S. Attorney for the Northern District to shelve the prosecution, that is an unlikely outcome, Henning said. "You don't want to play with a public corruption case, you're playing with fire," he said. He estimated Bruno's legal fees are astronomical. Bruno's new counsel, Abbe Lowell of Washington, D.C. doesn't work cheap. "I'd be shocked if he is less than $750 an hour," Henning said.

Lowell called the charges against his client "an unprecedented expansion of the 'honest services' theory that should trouble every part-time legislator because of its attempts to make criminal a person's need to have an outside job."

Henning said public officials already are on guard to keep work and public business separate.

Former AG: Theft of Honest Services Statue "Notoriously Vague"

Fri, 03 Apr 2009 00:00:00 GMT

April 3, 2009

Op-Ed Contributor

Prosecutors Gone Wild

By JOHN FARMER

Chatham, N.J.

THERE is both good news and bad in the Justice Department's decision to move to dismiss all charges against former Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, who had been convicted on seven felony counts of ethics violations. The good news is that Attorney General Eric Holder has done the right thing, acknowledging that his department's Public Integrity Section, which handles corruption cases, committed egregious misconduct. The bad news is that the broader problem of prosecutorial excess remains unaddressed.

The Stevens case did not occur in a vacuum, and it should not be treated as an isolated instance. Take, as examples, just a few recent cases.

Last year, the City of New York paid $3.5 million to Shih-Wei Su, who had served nearly 13 years in prison on charges related to a shooting at a pool hall in Queens. Judge Guido Calabresi of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that "the prosecution knowingly elicited false testimony from a crucial witness."

In the Duke University rape case of 2006, the reputations of several students were destroyed by a county district attorney pursuing political ambitions, and who was later disbarred and convicted of criminal contempt.

In 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit took the extraordinary step of ordering the release of a convicted Wisconsin state employee during oral argument; it then reversed her federal conviction, which had been based on the government's overreaching application of the "theft of honest services" corruption statute. She later said that the United States attorney, who had been appointed by President George W. Bush, offered her leniency if she would cooperate in a case against the governor, a Democrat in a tight re-election campaign.

In 2005, a veteran New Jersey county prosecutor was driven from office after it was leaked to the press that he was under federal investigation for obstruction of justice. No charges were ever filed.

In 2004, a federal judge threw out the convictions of two men accused of being part of a terrorist "sleeper cell" in Detroit after it was discovered that federal prosecutors had deliberately withheld potentially exculpatory evidence from the defense.

What's going on here? Equally important, beyond the Stevens case, what can be done?

As the examples above show, prosecutorial misconduct takes many forms, from failing to disclose critical evidence to disclosing information illegally to the press to overreaching in the exercise of the prosecutor's discretion. Underlying all of them is a frightening misconception of the role of the prosecutor.

That role is not to seek the maximum penalty at every turn, nor to put together an impressive statistical tally of convictions. It is not to use the emotional pain and personal ruin involved on all sides of a criminal case to advance one's own career or personal agenda. Prosecutors do not even share the duty defense lawyers have of providing zealous representation. The prosecutor's only duty is to seek justice. Period.

This duty is especially important in an age like ours, when the integrity of the criminal justice process is so frequently called into question.

The presumption of innocence vanishes, these days, with the publicity surrounding an accusation. Any criminal defense lawyer has seen firsthand the humiliation and fear experienced by defendants and their families. By contrast, the reputation of the accusing prosecutor rises commensurately, creating an enormous temptation to make the press conference an essential element of the prosecution.

Attorney General Holder has a lot on his plate, but I think only terrorism policy is equally important to issues surrounding the integrity of the justice system. His goal should be to restore the imperative that prosecutors seek justice, nothing more.

One way to do that would be for Mr. Holder to forbid federal prosecutors to conduct press conferences to announce the filing of charges. The mischief done by statements like "The conduct would make Lincoln roll over in his grave," as issued by the United States attorney in Chicago, Patrick Fitzgerald, in announcing the filing of a criminal complaint against Gov. Rod Blagojevich of Illinois, is almost incalculable. Save the rhetoric for the conviction; a simple press release setting forth the charges and reminding the public of the presumption of innocence will serve the interests of justice.

The attorney general could also seek clarity in the federal criminal statutes in order to narrow the potential for abuse of the prosecutor's discretion. The "theft of honest services" statute - created in 1988 to counter a Supreme Court decision that politicians could not be convicted of depriving their constituents of "intangible rights" like good government and honest services - is notoriously vague, and thus prone to prosecutorial overreaching. As Judge Frank Easterbrook of the Seventh Circuit wrote in the Wisconsin case, "The idea that it is a federal crime for any official in state or local government to take account of political considerations when deciding how to spend money is preposterous."

The Justice Department should commit to investigating all illegal disclosures of grand jury evidence and instances of courtroom misconduct, and to punish those responsible.

Above all, Mr. Holder should promote the idea that the prosecutor's job, understood properly, is an end in itself, not a stepping stone to higher office. The powers to accuse, to arrest and to prosecute are the most fearsome conferred by our society. The abuse of those powers, historically, has been the very definition of tyranny. Accordingly, the attorney general should consider supporting a rule barring prosecutors from seeking higher office for two to five years after their tenure ends.

The motives underlying a decision to prosecute may rarely be beyond reproach, but they should always be above politics.

John Farmer, a lawyer, was the attorney general of New Jersey from 1999 to 2002.

Hurtgen withdraws guilty pleas; 6 of 7 charges dismissed

Sat, 18 Sep 2010 00:00:00 GMT

Federal prosecutors in Chicago have dismissed six corruption-related charges against Nicholas Hurtgen, the former top Wisconsin state official and Bear Stearns director caught in the corruption investigation of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Hurtgen had been charged under the "honest services" fraud statute. But in June the U.S. Supreme Court� narrowed�the coverage of that law�to cover only bribes and kickbacks,�so Hurtgen -- like many defendants convicted under the broader interpretation of the law -- sought to withdraw�the�guilty pleas he had entered to the charges last year.��Hurtgen pleaded guilty to threatening to deny state permission for a suburban hospital expansion if the hospital's chief didn't hire a contractor favored by Blagojevich.

On Wednesday, a judge allowed Hurtgen to withdraw the pleas, and prosecutors dismissed the charges. Hurtgen still faces a related extortion charge, and has until Oct. 8 to file any motion to dismiss that count.

After rising to a top post in the Department of Administration under�Thompson, Hurtgen joined Bear Stearns in 1995 and later became the managing director of the investment�firm's Chicago office. He also played a key role in Thompson's campaign fund raising before Thompson left office in 2001 to become federal health and human services secretary.

"Bruno Get Ready To Fight"

Tue, 10 Feb 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Embattled former Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, recently indicted by a Federal Grand Jury, refuses to roll over for over-reaching Federal Prosecutors who may have a problem proving any real crime in Bruno's business activities. A thorough review of the indictment leaves one wondering "where's the beef?"

No governmental decision or award seems tied to Bruno's consulting business. Bruno has retained legendary defense lawyer Abbe Lowell, known for his unyielding and aggressive defense of his clients including former New Jersey Senator Robert Torricelli who told the STONEzone " Lowell is a fighter, not the guy you want if are gonna negotiate a plea but the best man for an all-out war". Joe Bruno is fighter too.

We predict his exoneration.

Troy Record Column: Attorney Gets It Right In Defense of Bruno

Fri, 17 Apr 2009 00:00:00 GMT

�

The Troy Record (TroyRecord.com), Serving Troy and its surrounding communities

First there was the group "Lawyers for Bruno" and now there is a Web site called "Justice for Joe Bruno."

It's unclear who is behind the site, and of course it's pro-Bruno, but attorney Lora Como, who used to work for the Senate, writes one of the more poignant entries, actually one of the only entries.

She trashes the "theft of honest services" charge, which is the only real charge Bruno has lodged against him though there is a ton of innuendo that he used his position as Senate majority leader to line his pockets.

Como cites a dissenting opinion by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote that it is way too broad and could apply to any legislator who votes on a bill just to help him or her get re-elected. Nobody in Albany would do that now would they?

Como goes on to quote Scalia: "Indeed it would seemingly cover a salaried employee's phoning in sick to go to a ball game." Which is along the same lines we've written here before. We're a tad hurt she didn't cite Talespin in her legal analysis but, regrettably, we just don't carry the same weight as a justice of the Supreme Court.

Como goes on to say the case may eventually end up in front of Scalia and the rest of the justices.

Obviously Bruno, who recently turned 80, hasn't lost the fight in his belly and he may take this one all the way to the highest court in the land.

Attorney's Letter Outlines Improper Investigation Against Bruno

Fri, 27 Mar 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Click�here to view letter

Bruno Spokesman Criticizes Feds Publicly: FBI Visits Next Day

Wed, 22 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT

�

Former Senator Joseph Bruno's flack Kris Thompson blasts feds, then gets subpoenaed

BY Kenneth Lovett
DAILY NEWS ALBANY BUREAU CHIEF

Thursday, July 16th 2009, 4:00 AM

M. Benjamin for News

Joseph Bruno's spokesperson was subpoenaed.

ALBANY - Indicted former Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno's spokesman was subpoenaed by the FBI Tuesday - a day after ripping the federal prosecutor in the case.

Kris Thompson said two FBI agents showed up at his job in the morning and slapped him with the subpoena. It asked for any notes or material he may have involving an interview Bruno did with New York magazine in January 2008.

Thompson, who was Bruno's spokesman in the Senate for about three years and works for him in the private sector, was also ordered to appear as a witness at the trial.

The FBI agents delivered the subpoena a day after Thompson spoke to the Daily News about Bruno's decision to use more than $440,000 in campaign money for his legal fees.

Bruno is under indictment on federal corruption charges.

In defending the use of campaign funds, Thompson said, "It is an appropriate use given that you have an overzealous and out-of-control government prosecutor embarking on a political witch hunt."

Before Tuesday, Thompson said he had never had any contact with investigators handling the case.

"I don't know if it was a coincidence, but certainly it was unsettling," he said of the timing.

"It occurred one day after I was quoted in the Daily News. I'll let people draw their own conclusions."

FBI spokesman Paul Holstein had no comment.

Indictment: In Desperate Search of a Crime

Sat, 02 May 2009 00:00:00 GMT

�

�Bruno files motion to dismiss indictment

ALBANY - Defense attorneys have filed a motion to dismiss the federal indictment against former state Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, claiming that it was an "an indictment in desperate search of a crime."

The motion, which was filed in U.S. District Court Friday along with a 40-page supporting memorandum, described how the indictment against the former senator sought to "create a crime where none exists" by not naming specific instances where Bruno had violated state law or matters before the state Legislature that had been directly affected by his alleged conflicts of interest.

An eight-count indictment handed up by a federal grand jury on Jan. 23 charged the 80-year-old Republican with carrying out a scheme to defraud the state and its citizens of their right to his honest services by using his position to steer money from entities with business before the Legislature to outside companies he worked for as a consultant.

The indictment came at the end of a three-year investigation by the FBI that was thought to have been nearly disbanded when the charges were filed.

"Indeed, the indictment does not even claim that Mr. Bruno engaged in any specific or identifiable official acts as a New York State Senator to reward himself, his friends, or his business associates," wrote Bruno's defense team, which includes Abbe D. Lowell, of Washington, D.C. and William Dreyer, of Albany.

During his first appearance in federal court, and for days thereafter, Bruno staunchly maintained his innocence, as he had throughout the investigation, and vowed to fight the charges.

The documents went on to explain how Title 18, Section 1346 of U.S. Code, which deals with depriving others of honest services, has been routinely criticized by various courts over the years for its vagueness and could even be considered unconstitutional.

"The statute outlaws 'a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services,' a phrase that is not defined in the United States Code, has divided the United States Courts as to its meaning, and has been repeatedly criticized as vague and overly ambiguous," wrote the attorneys. "While the government seeks to define that phrase in its indictment against Mr. Bruno, its definition is far worse than the language of the statute itself - a requirement that every state legislator engage in 'disinterested decision making' and disclose 'potential motivations' or face a felony prosecution under Section 1346."

The indictment alleged that Bruno had been paid $3.2 million from various entities between 1993 and 2006 for consulting fees but had never actually performed "legitimate work commensurate with the payments" he received. The U.S. Attorneys Office had also claimed Bruno had improperly filled out annual financial disclosure forms in an effort to hide the true source of his income.

However, Bruno's attorneys disagreed, stating that the disclosure forms were completed adequately for the questions asked and the practice of his fellow legislators.

"All the government manages to assert is that Mr. Bruno, like so many other state governmental officials, has a part-time job, a wholly appropriate and legal endeavor in New York, and that even though Mr. Bruno disclosed that he worked as a consultant on various state ethical disclosure forms, his disclosures were somehow insufficient," wrote the defense.

Furthermore, the supporting documents stated that section 1346 "unconstitutionally intrudes on state sovereignty" by bringing up issues of the Federal Government setting standards of disclosure and good government for local and state officials, raising "grave federalism concerns."

Bruno's attorneys also filed additional motions to strike government claims for the possible forfeiture of his property, disclosure of the instructions given to the grand jury which indicted him, and a separate motion to dismiss the indictment because the government is alleging conduct going back up to 16 years for offenses which, according to the defense, carry a five-year statute of limitations.

U.S. District Judge Gary Sharpe had previously imposed a May 1 deadline for motions in the case.

Bruno, who worked as a private businessman in the early 1970s, was first elected to the Senate to represent the 43rd district in 1976. He was elected to serve as the majority leader in 1995 and continued to hold that position until he resigned from the Legislature on June 24, 2008.

Bruno's criminal trial is tentatively scheduled to begin in November.

Tom Caprood can be reached at 270-1278 or by e-mail at tcaprood@troyrecord.com.

Prosecutorial Misconduct: Feds Drop Case Against Sen. Stevens

Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Justice Department Files Motion to Drop Case Against Former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens

The U.S. Justice Department has asked the federal court to dismiss its case against former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, who was convicted of seven felony counts of corruption in the fall.

FOXNews.com

Wednesday, April 01, 2009

The U.S. Justice Department filed a motion Wednesday to drop its case against former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, who was convicted of seven felony counts of corruption last fall.

Attorney General Eric Holder decided to abandon the case due to prosecutorial misconduct -- one Justice Department source called the stunning turnaround a "black eye"�on the department and the FBI.�

Stevens was convicted last year of lying on a Senate disclosure form in order to hide $250,000 in gifts he received from an oil company executive and friends.

Only after the conviction did allegations of FBI misconduct come to light. The judge in the case has repeatedly delayed sentencing Stevens, and at one point he held prosecutors in contempt.�Justice Department officials later replaced the trial team.�

Stevens sought to dismiss the case, and Wednesday's action in effect supports his request.�A hearing has been set for April 7.�

In a written statement released Wednesday morning, Stevens suggested he would have fared better in his losing November election had it not been for the "unfair" case against him.�

"I always knew that there would be a day when the cloud that surrounded me would be removed. That day has finally come,"�Stevens said. "It is unfortunate that an election was affected by proceedings now recognized as unfair. It was my great honor to serve the state of Alaska in the United States Senate for 40 years."�

Holder said he would not seek a new trial.�

"After careful review, I have concluded that certain information should have been provided to the defense for use at trial. In light of this conclusion, and in consideration of the totality of the circumstances of this particular case, I have determined that it is in the interest of justice to dismiss the indictment and not proceed with a new trial,"�Holder said in a statement released shortly after the motion was filed Wednesday.

Holder reportedly decided Tuesday to dismiss the original indictment rather than proceed to more hearings that might embarrass the department.

"Given what has happened in this case, it's not surprising" that charges against Stevens are being dropped, a source close to the case told FOX�News.

Stevens' attorneys claimed the government "disregarded the Constitution" by going through with the prosecution but praised both Holder, the new prosecutorial team and Judge Emmett G. Sullivan for demonstrating integrity in the case.

"The misconduct of government prosecutors, and one or more FBI agents, was stunning. Not only did the government fail to disclose evidence of innocence, but instead intentionally hid that evidence and created false evidence that they provided to the defense,"�said attorneys Brendan�V. Sullivan Jr. and Robert M.�Cary.�

"Had Judge Sullivan accepted the word of government prosecutors as is done often in our courts, the extraordinary misconduct would never have been uncovered, and the trial verdict might have survived appellate review. Judge Sullivan prevented such a tragic outcome. ...
Attorney General Eric Holder, too, should be commended. He is a pillar of integrity
in the legal community, and his actions today prove it,"�they said.

The motion says the Department of Justice only "recently" discovered that Bill Allen -- the prosecution's star witness and an oil executive whose former company, Veco Corp., paid for some of the improvements to Stevens' home in Alaska -- was interviewed on April 15, 2008, but the defense never knew about it.�

The motion states that "no memorandum of interview or agent notes" were written after the interview and that a response from Allen regarding a note dated Oct. 6, 2002, was inconsistent with his testimony during trial.�

Thus, the motion says, "this information could have been used by the defendant [during trial] to cross-examine Bill Allen and in arguments to the jury."

In the motion, the Justice Department says: "Given the facts of this particular case, the government believes that granting a new trial is in the interest of justice,"�but, "the government has further determined that, based on the totality of circumstances and in the interest of justice, it will not seek a new trial."

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski said she was happy with the news, but troubled by the implication.�

"I was pleased with the news that the Justice Department will drop all charges against Senator Ted Stevens, but I am deeply disturbed that the government can ruin a man's career and then say 'never mind.' There is nothing that will ever compensate for the loss of his reputation or leadership to the State of Alaska,"�she said.�

Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, who beat Stevens in the November election, released a statement saying the end to prosecution is "reasonable."�

"I always said I didn't think Senator Stevens should serve time in jail and hopefully this decision ensures that is the case. It's time for Senator Stevens, his family and Alaskans to move on and put this behind us," the former Anchorage mayor said.�

In addition to Stevens' age -- he's 85 -- and the fact that he is no longer in the Senate, sources told National Public Radio that Holder wants to send a strong message to prosecutors that misconduct will not be tolerated.

Holder said in his statement that the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility will review the prosecution of Stevens' case, but no conclusions should be drawn.

"This does not mean or imply that any determination has been made about the conduct of those attorneys who handled the investigation and trial of this case,"�Holder said.

Click here to read more on this story from NPR.

FOX�News' Mike Levine contributed to this report.

Coalition Questions Indictment

Tue, 10 Mar 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Group of NY lawyers supports Bruno

March 5, 2009

ALBANY, N.Y. - Several lawyers say they have formed a coalition to support Joseph Bruno, the former state Senate leader accused of using his public post to enrich himself by $3.2 million, and the indictment against him is flawed.

The group's chairmen are defense attorneys Stephen Coffey and E. Stewart Jones Jr. Its eight other members include Patricia DeAngelis, former district attorney in Rensselaer County, Bruno's home base.

Coffey describes as puzzling the federal theft of honest services charge against the former Republican leader, who was indicted after a three-year investigation. Coffey calls the prosecution unwise and unwinnable.

Calls to the federal prosecutors were not immediately returned Thursday. They have convicted others under the 20-year-old statute.

"The Presumption of Innocence Should Not Be Taken Lightly"

Wed, 19 Jul 2006 00:00:00 GMT

Please click here to download article

Federal Judge Orders Probe Into Prosecutors

Tue, 07 Apr 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Stevens case closed, case against prosecutors open

Stevens' conviction dismissed, judge orders criminal probe of prosecutors for misconduct

�

By NEDRA PICKLER and MATT APUZZO, Associated Press
Last updated: 12:35 p.m., Tuesday, April 7, 2009

�

WASHINGTON -- A federal judge dismissed the corruption conviction of former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens on Tuesday and took the rare and serious step of opening a criminal investigation into prosecutors who mishandled the case.

"In nearly 25 years on the bench, I've never seen anything approaching the mishandling and misconduct that I've seen in this case," U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said.

Sullivan appointed a special prosecutor to investigate Justice Department lawyers who repeatedly mishandled witnesses and withheld evidence from defense attorneys during the monthlong trial. Stevens was convicted in October of lying on Senate forms about home renovations and gifts he received from wealthy friends.

The case cost Stevens a Senate seat he had held for 40 years. Once the Senate's longest-serving Republican, he narrowly lost to Democrat Mark Begich shortly after the verdict.

As Sullivan dismissed the case, Stevens turned to his friends and held up a fist in victory as his wife and daughters broke into loud sobs.

"Until recently, my faith in the criminal system, particularly the judicial system, was unwavering," Stevens told the court Tuesday, his first public comments since Attorney General Eric Holder announced he would drop the case. "But what some members of the prosecution team did nearly destroyed my faith. Their conduct had consequences for me that they will never realize and can never be reversed."

Sullivan appointed Washington attorney Henry Schuelke as a special prosecutor to investigate contempt and obstruction by the Justice Department team. He said the matter was too serious to be left to an internal investigation by the department, which he said has dragged its feet looking into the misconduct.

In a criminal case, the prosecutors could face prison time and fines. The decision raises the question of whether the prosecutors, who include the top two officials in the department's public corruption unit, can remain on the job while under criminal investigation.

Sullivan repeatedly scolded prosecutors for their behavior during trial. After the verdict, an FBI whistleblower accused the team of misconduct and Sullivan held prosecutors in contempt for ignoring a court order.

The prosecution team was replaced and, last week, new prosecutors acknowledged that key evidence was withheld from Stevens. That evidence included notes from an interview with the government's star witness, contractor Bill Allen.

On the witness stand, Allen said a mutual friend told him not to expect Stevens to pay for the home renovation project because Stevens only wanted the bill to cover himself.

But in the previously undisclosed meeting with prosecutors, Allen said he had no recollection of such a discussion. And he valued the renovation work at far less than what prosecutors alleged at trial.

"I was sick in my stomach," attorney Brendan Sullivan said Tuesday, recalling seeing the new evidence for the first time. "How could they do this? How could they abandon their responsibilities? How could they take on a very decent man, Ted Stevens, who happened to be a United States senator, and do this?"

With the prosecution team now under the scrutiny Stevens felt for years, the 85-year-old smiled and posed for pictures with his family on the courthouse steps.

"I'm going to enjoy this wonderful day," he said.

Motions Filed To Dismiss Charges

Sat, 02 May 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Bruno claims case tainted

Lawyers for ex-Senate leader want charges dropped, citing lack of fair warning in statute

�

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau
Click byline for more stories by writer.
First published: Saturday, May 2, 2009

�

ALBANY - Attorneys for former state Sen. Joseph L. Bruno filed a motion Friday asking a federal judge to kill the criminal case against him.

The federal statute central to the case never gave the Brunswick Republican fair warning that he might be breaking the law while in office, defense lawyers said.

Filed a few minutes before the deadline to respond to the Jan. 23 federal indictment against Bruno, the motion to dismiss reads like an opening statement for trial. Bruno has emphatically stressed his innocence and has pledged to fight the felony charges before a jury.

"The government has filed an indictment in desperate search of a crime," the motion states, noting that he is not accused of soliciting bribes, taking kickbacks or misappropriating funds.

Bruno, 80, is accused of eight counts of honest services fraud, each punishable by up to 20 years in prison. The charges allege he denied the public their right to honest services because he used his office to enrich himself as a private businessman and never revealed what he was doing. Bruno ran a consulting business and represented investment firms seeking business from New York labor union pension and health funds.

The indictment alleges Bruno gained from his elected job by pocketing at least $3.2 million in private consulting fees from clients who sought to use his influence.

Defense lawyers contend Bruno broke no law because he disclosed his dealings as fully as the state ethics disclosure rules require. They say federal prosecutors are manufacturing charges by alleging Bruno denied the public of "disinterested decision making" and did not completely disclose and conflicts of interest.

The conduct, the lawyers say, are "at worst . . . a state law misdemeanor" under circumstances that aren't even applicable in the Bruno case.

Lawyers familiar with the honest services statute say it can successfully be applied to wide variety of improper activities of public officers because it is so malleable.

Bruno's lawyers say the statute is not applicable in a case of non-disclosure of business activities. They contend the honest services law is too vague to be constitutional. "It fails to provide Mr. Bruno with notice of what is a crime and what is not," the motion said.

More than 100 other lawmakers held part-time jobs at the time Bruno was acting as a consultant and they all disclosed as much as required, which in New York is a modest level of information. Government reform groups have complained for years that the ethics forms lack detail.

"If permitted to succeed, the government will outlaw conduct of nearly every New York legislator with part-time outside employment," the defense lawyers said. The indictment claims that from 1993 through 2005, all of Bruno's annual financial disclosures, required by the state's Ethics in Government law, contain false, misleading and incomplete information. Bruno, as leader of the Senate, controlled the legislative ethics panel which could step in if complaints arise.

Bruno quit the Senate in June after 32 years amid a lengthy probe of many of his private affairs as well as actions of some of his children. His exit came after serving as Senate majority leader since 1995. By July, he was reemployed as chief executive of CMA Consulting in Latham, a company serving many state agencies with computer software and applications services.

Wayne State Law School Professor Peter Henning, who has studied more than 200 honest services cases, said the arguments by Bruno lawyers, led by Abbe D. Lowell in Washington, D.C, and William J. Dreyer in Albany, are similar to those he's seen in dozens of cases. They have never resulted in a dismissal from a trial court judge, he said, and could be aimed at the hope this case or a similar one arrives at the U.S. Supreme Court to test the constitutionality of the honest services statute.

"He's covering himself in case of the one in a million shot that honest services is rendered unconstitutional," Henning said. "It's not a bad argument, it just hasn't won. He's got a good point."

Bruno conviction to be nixed

Tue, 16 Nov 2010 00:00:00 GMT

ALBANY -- Federal prosecutors, citing a recent US Supreme Court decision, have conceded for the first time that last year's conviction of former state Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno on two felony counts must be dismissed, The Post has learned.

The concession came in a letter from Northern District US Attorney Richard Hartunian to Bruno lawyer William Dreyer late last month in response to Dreyer's inquiry about the impact of the unanimous Supreme Court ruling in June throwing out the complicated "honest services" statute under which Bruno was convicted.

Hartunian, after reviewing details of the decision and noting that the judge's instructions to the jury were based on the now-nullified statute, told Dreyer, "We will concede that reversal is appropriate as a result of the instructional error."

The letter asks that Bruno's lawyer agree that new charges under a different section of law could be brought against the 82-year-old Rensselaer County Republican in exchange for the dismissal of the charges.

"There's not a chance that any defense attorney in the world would ever agree to such a stupid request," said prominent Albany trial lawyer Stephen Coffey, a Bruno friend and legal adviser who is familiar with the letter.

"I think the federal prosecutors are making fools of themselves with this," Coffey continued.

Bruno, it was learned, plans instead to file an appeal of his conviction with the federal Circuit Court of Appeals next month, citing the Supreme Court decision and, possibly, Hartunian's letter and its concession that the conviction should be reversed.

A spokesman for Hartunian could not be reached for comment.

Bruno was convicted on two of eight charges after a lengthy trial in which he was accused of concealing hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments from a businessman who had sought help from the Legislature.

He was sentenced to two years in prison and ordered to pay $280,000 in restitution, but the penalty was stayed pending a much-anticipated US Supreme Court decision involving the "honest services" section of the federal mail-fraud law under which he was tried.

fredric.dicker@nypost.com

"Bruno Dips Inside the Beltway for Counsel"

Fri, 30 Jan 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Joe Bruno, the pugnacious former New York state senator who was recently indicted on eight counts of public corruption, shored up his legal team last week with McDermott Will & Emery's Abbe Lowell.

Lowell is representing Bruno alongside William Dreyer of the Albany-based Dreyer Boyajian. Lowell, who also represents convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, is coming off a victory in another high-profile public corruption case. In November, the Justice Department dropped its long-running investigation into the affairs of Lowell's client, Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons, who was dogged by allegations that he steered millions of dollars in defense contracts to a software company in return for cash and cruises.

Bruno is accused of commingling his private business and his public office in undisclosed business arrangements with more than a dozen unions and other firms looking to do business with the state. Bruno, 79, who spent 32 years in the Senate, including 14 as majority leader, collected as much as $3.1 million through the deals, prosecutors allege. The indictment says Bruno deprived the public of his honest services by using his office for private gain from 1993 through at least December 2006.

Lowell says the charges represent "an unprecedented expansion of the 'honest services' theory that should trouble every part-time legislator because of its attempts to make criminal a person's need to have an outside job. After 40 years of great public service, Sen. Bruno deserves a lot better than he received from the prosecutors."

Defense: Prosecution Attempting to Prejudice Bruno Case

Mon, 20 Apr 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Bruno wants softer indictment wording

Lawyers say language is ''inflammatory'' and could prejudice jury

By BRENDAN J. LYONS, Senior writer
Click byline for more stories by writer.
First published: Tuesday, April 21, 2009

ALBANY -- Former Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno wants the federal government to tone down the language in an 8-count felony indictment that his attorneys say is inflammatory and prejudicial.
A motion filed last week by Bruno's defense team marks the case's first legal challenge and sets the stage for what is expected to be an intensive pre-trial battle.

The unusual defense motion attacks much of the language in the indictment, characterizing portions of the 35-page document as nothing more than an attempt by the government ''to prejudice Mr. Bruno and confuse the jury.'' The motion also alleges federal prosecutors have sought to amplify their allegations by including conduct by Bruno that predates a five-year statute of limitations.

''Prosecutors here have sought to make a federal crime out of alleged ethical lapses that do not even amount to a state law misdemeanor,'' the motion states. ''In some effort to justify and 'dress up' its charges against Mr. Bruno, the government has included allegations in the indictment that are not relevant to the crimes charged and are prejudicial and inflammatory.''

For instance, the defense has asked U.S. District Judge Gary L. Sharpe to strike a portion of a sentence which indicates the state of New York and its citizens paid Bruno for his honest services but as a result of his fraud they were deprived ''and instead received dishonest services.''

''There is no offense in the statute or case law called 'provision of dishonest services','' the defense motion states, calling the language ''superfluous and inflammatory.'' They asked that that portion of the sentence be removed.

The case is scheduled for trial in November and the indictment would be provided to a federal jury panel as a blueprint of the government's case during their deliberations.

Bruno, 80, was indicted Jan. 23 on eight charges of theft of honest services under federal mail and wire fraud statutes. The detailed, narrative-style indictment outlines suspicious business and political dealings of Bruno's dating to 1993 and continuing through 2006. If convicted on any of the charges Bruno could face a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, although under federal sentencing guidelines he would likely face much less time behind bars.

The charges outline numerous instances where Bruno, while occupying the state's powerful position of Senate majority leader, allegedly concealed one after another payments steered to him personally by people and organizations seeking an advantage in state politics. The indictment claims that from 1993 through 2005, all of Bruno's annual financial disclosures, required by the state's Ethics in Government law, contained false, misleading and incomplete information.

The indictment also outlines a series of deals and business arrangements dating back to 1993 in which Bruno allegedly profited from companies or individuals who had an interest in state government. Bruno also steered labor unions to invest in companies that were paying him hundreds of thousands of dollars as a ''consultant,'' according to the indictment.

The government accuses Bruno of receiving more than $3.1 million in alleged payoffs between 1993 and 2006. But Bruno's attorneys, Abbe D. Lowell of Washington, D.C., and William J. Dreyer of Albany, said a large portion of those transactions took place before 2004 and therefore fall outside a five year statute of limitations, and the information should not be included in the indictment, according to the motion.

The indictment also describes ''schemes'' involving Bruno's use of public office to convince labor unions to steer their money management to Wright Investors Service, a Connecticut firm that paid him nearly $1.4 million from 1994 to 2006, and McGinn, Smith & Co., an Albany investment firm that paid Bruno $632,116 from 1993 to 2005. The firms ended up receiving investment advisory fees or brokerage fees paid by the union benefit funds.

Defense lawyers asked for the allegations tied to McGinn, Smith to be stricken from the indictment because, in part, ''the indictment does not allege ... a single mailing or wire transaction relating to McGinn, Smith that was sent to or received by Mr. Bruno.''

The defense team has asked for a hearing on their motion next month. Prosecutors have not filed a reply.

The indictment is the culmination of a more than three-year FBI investigation into the public and private dealings of Bruno. He retired from his state Senate seat in July after 32 years in legislative service.

Brendan J. Lyons can be reached at 454-5547 or by e-mail at blyons@timesunion.com.

"Joe Bruno demands his day in court"

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 00:00:00 GMT

TROY - Former state Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, who was indicted by a federal grand jury Friday, is eagerly awaiting his day in court and said that there is no chance of a plea deal.

Bruno met Tuesday with The Record's editorial board and said that getting the facts about his past business dealings heard in open court, rather than behind the closed doors of a grand jury, is the only fair break he is going to get.

The eight-count indictment charges the 79-year-old Republican with carrying out a scheme to defraud the state and its citizens of the right to his honest services by using his position to steer money from entities with business before the Legislature to outside companies he worked for as a consultant.

From 1993 to 2006, investigators allege he improperly earned $3.2 million by not doing any work at all but just being in his elected position. State legislators are part time and are allowed to do other work on the side and Bruno set up a consulting company based out of his home.

"We're going to get this into open court and I want to expedite a trial as quickly as we can get there," said Bruno, who pleaded not guilty in federal court Friday afternoon.

"If there's any relief here it's that they came out from behind their closed doors and into the open, and I'm really looking forward to airing this because I'm going to be vindicated," he continued. "I'm going to be innocent of having committed any crime here because I know I didn't."

Bruno referred to the three-year investigation by the U.S. Attorney's office and the FBI as a "fishing expedition" and a "witch hunt" which had touched nearly every aspect of his professional, political, and business life over the last 15 years.

However, Bruno had been fairly certain the investigation was nearing its end because, according to him, investigators had been unable to find any leads or any witnesses to prove there was any quid pro quo until it was nearly time for the grand jury to disband last week.

"It appears to me that in some form of panic, they quickly, last week sometime, started putting together an indictment," said Bruno, adding everything in the indictment was circumstantial because prosecutors assumed he was doing something wrong. "I'm not a lawyer, but my lawyers, along with others that have called in from across the nation, said they have never seen such a piece of garbage."

The indictment alleges that Bruno, working as an employee of a Connecticut investment services firm, directed labor unions which had business before with the state Legislature and other state agencies to hire the firm to manage their money, and that he engaged in similar practices without properly identifying them on financial disclosure forms.

It alleges Bruno told his consulting clients that he received clearance from the Legislative Ethics Committee for their relationship but that he never did, and that the former political figure had never done any kind of consulting work or any work for the money he was paid. Rather, he was paid a finders fee if the companies got any business from Bruno's recommendations.

Bruno, who served 14 years in the powerful position of majority leader, said the allegations were nonsense.

"I obeyed all the laws. There's confusion there and they (government investigators) were so confused that they didn't have any clue how the system works, and they still don't fully understand," said Bruno. "I filed everything that I was supposed to file. I know what's right and I know what's wrong - I'm not a child."

According to Acting U.S. Attorney Andrew Baxter, the investigation first began when the government started looking into Bruno's use of government aircraft and that all sources of information, including press reports, were considered throughout the process.

Bruno maintained that he had every right to conduct outside business as a part-time legislator and that he had been selectively targeted with this investigation by political enemies who were "trying to make a career out of destroying him." He said with the new administration in Washington many U.S. Attorneys may be out of work and this was a way for them to "stick around a little longer."

"You wonder why anybody on this Earth would want to run for public office given what happens in circumstances like this," said Bruno.

After serving for 32 years in the state Senate, Bruno retired from the Legislature in July and went on to become the CEO of CMA Consulting Services, an information technology business in Latham.

If convicted, Bruno faces a maximum of 20 years in prison and fines of $250,000 for each of the eight counts of the indictment. He could also be forced to forfeit anything he purchased with the money.

While federal officials previously noted that it could be some time before Bruno is seen back in court, he said he is anxious for the case to go to trial as soon as possible.

"I've gotten to be almost 80 years old and I didn't get here, and didn't create the success that I've created in my life, by wimping out, backing off, and not being willing to fight," said Bruno. "And I'm not going to start now at this young and tender age."

Lawyers Support Bruno

Tue, 10 Mar 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Lawyers support embattled Bruno

Capital Region group says indictment flawed

�

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau
First published in print: Friday, March 6, 2009

�

ALBANY - A group of area attorneys have banded together to publicly criticize the federal indictment against former Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno.

�

Calling themselves "Lawyers For Bruno," the group is sharing a point of view that echoes many of the remarks Bruno has made since he was indicted by a federal grand jury Jan. 23 on eight criminal counts.

Led by E. Stewart Jones Jr. of Troy and Stephen Coffey of Albany, the 10 lawyers claim the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District has constructed charges on a flawed premise using the theft of honest services statute with dangerous disregard for fairness.

"This prosecution is unwise, unwarranted and . . . unwinnable," Coffey said in a news release. He did not return a call.

Coffey has represented witnesses in the case against Bruno. He is working for Susan Bruno, the oldest daughter of the senator, whose job with the Research Foundation of the State University of New York has come under scrutiny because of FBI inquiries about her assignments and her spotty attendance at her office at the foundation.

Jones, who also has represented witnesses who testified during the grand jury probe of the senator, said the group has reached out to non-lawyers as well to join in supporting Bruno.

"As citizens of the Capital District we stand by Joe Bruno," Jones said. "As officers of the court we are appalled at this indictment because of its fundamental legal flaws."

The group includes Michael D. Assaf, Jack Casey, Jim Crane, Harry Dagostino, Patricia DeAngelis, Marc Ehrlich, Andrew Martin and James Towne. Many "Lawyers for Bruno" members have benefited from business or political ties to the ex-senator.

"I don't think people appreciate just how amorphous this allegation is and how lacking in substance it is," Jones said. "It is a non-disclosure crime he's charged with here; he's accused of not disclosing information that did not help or hurt anybody. There's no quid pro quo, no crime charged."

William Pericak, assistant U.S. Attorney in the Bruno prosecution, said: "we have no comment on that." His office has defended the charges against Bruno as part of anti-corruption legislation passed by Congress to keep public officials honest.

Coffey and Jones Enlist Members For Support Group

Fri, 27 Mar 2009 00:00:00 GMT

Click�here to view story

Federal court reverses one of Ex-Newark Mayor Sharpe James' corruption convictions

Thu, 16 Sep 2010 00:00:00 GMT

NEWARK - A federal appeals court has reversed one of former Newark Mayor Sharpe James' corruption convictions.

In a ruling published today, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals threw out James' conviction for so-called "theft of honest services" fraud.

James' convictions on four other counts remain unchanged. �The longtime mayor of New Jersey's largest city was convicted in April 2008 and sentenced to 27 months in prison. �He was released last spring to serve out the remaining time in a halfway house. �Thursday's reversal was prompted by a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that narrowed the definition of theft of honest services to cases where defendants take bribes or kickbacks. �James was convicted of fraud and conspiracy for steering sweetheart land deals to a girlfriend.

Joe Bruno

"Now in the Private Sector, Bruno Is Selling Efficiency and Openness"

High Profile Attorneys Back Bruno

'Lawyers for Bruno' assembles high-profile attorneys in support of ex-Senator

"Janison: Statute's elasticity sparks debate"

Justice Dept Notified About Possible Intimidating FBI Tactics

Bruno to probers: 'Back off'

Law Professor: Feds May Have Problems in Bruno Case

A trip to the outer limits

Former AG: Theft of Honest Services Statue "Notoriously Vague"

Prosecutors Gone Wild

Hurtgen withdraws guilty pleas; 6 of 7 charges dismissed

"Bruno Get Ready To Fight"

Troy Record Column: Attorney Gets It Right In Defense of Bruno

Talespin: Bruno support moves to Web

Attorney's Letter Outlines Improper Investigation Against Bruno

Bruno Spokesman Criticizes Feds Publicly: FBI Visits Next Day

Former Senator Joseph Bruno's flack Kris Thompson blasts feds, then gets subpoenaed

Indictment: In Desperate Search of a Crime

Prosecutorial Misconduct: Feds Drop Case Against Sen. Stevens

Justice Department Files Motion to Drop Case Against Former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens

The U.S. Justice Department has asked the federal court to dismiss its case against former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, who was convicted of seven felony counts of corruption in the fall.

Coalition Questions Indictment

Group of NY lawyers supports Bruno

"The Presumption of Innocence Should Not Be Taken Lightly"

Federal Judge Orders Probe Into Prosecutors

Stevens case closed, case against prosecutors open Stevens' conviction dismissed, judge orders criminal probe of prosecutors for misconduct

Motions Filed To Dismiss Charges

Bruno conviction to be nixed

"Bruno Dips Inside the Beltway for Counsel"

Defense: Prosecution Attempting to Prejudice Bruno Case

Bruno wants softer indictment wording

Lawyers say language is ''inflammatory'' and could prejudice jury

"Joe Bruno demands his day in court"

Lawyers Support Bruno

Lawyers support embattled Bruno

Coffey and Jones Enlist Members For Support Group

Federal court reverses one of Ex-Newark Mayor Sharpe James' corruption convictions

Stevens case closed, case against prosecutors open

Stevens' conviction dismissed, judge orders criminal probe of prosecutors for misconduct