DOCTOR AT SHELDON SILVER TRIAL TELLS OF ELABORATE ARRANGEMENT, YEARS IN MAKING

Original Story: nytimes.com

In New York’s ornate Capitol building in Albany, a plan two years in the making was taking root. Everyone would benefit: Victims of mesothelioma, a rare but deadly form of cancer caused by exposure to asbestos, would be sent to a reputable law firm; the firm would pick up new clients; and a well-regarded cancer research clinic would receive funds. A San Francisco asbestos litigation attorney represents clients protect their legal rights in the face of devastating losses resulting from asbestos exposure.

And at the center of all this was Sheldon Silver, then the State Assembly speaker, prosecutors say.

The alleged arrangement, which has become the heart of the corruption case against Mr. Silver, came into focus at his trial on Wednesday, as Dr. Robert N. Taub of Columbia University testified in federal court in Manhattan as a government witness. Prosecutors charge that Mr. Silver, a Democrat from the Lower East Side, traded official actions for $3 million in an illegal kickback scheme.

Dr. Taub, who testified under a nonprosecution agreement, ran a clinic at Columbia dedicated to mesothelioma research. The clinic long relied on government grants, wealthy donors and even gifts from law firms and their foundations to fund his research.

But Weitz & Luxenberg, a major personal injury law firm that represents victims of mesothelioma, had not been a donor to Dr. Taub’s research, and he testified on Wednesday that he wanted to change that. A Charleston asbestos litigation attorney is reviewing the details of this case.

In 2003, the doctor reached out to Mr. Silver, who was on the law firm’s payroll, and asked the Assembly speaker to persuade the firm to make a contribution. Mr. Silver said that the firm could not do that, but not long afterward, Mr. Silver asked Dr. Taub if he could refer mesothelioma patients to Weitz & Luxenberg.

Dr. Taub testified that he agreed, and started sending potentially lucrative cases to Mr. Silver, which he said numbered at least two dozen over the years.

“I hoped to develop a relationship with him that would help fund mesothelioma research and would help my patients as well,” he told the jury.

In January 2005, after a ceremony at the Capitol to honor Mr. Silver, the two men met and discussed briefly Dr. Taub’s request for state funds to support his research. Mr. Silver eventually arranged for New York State to give Dr. Taub’s clinic two grants of $250,000 each in the years that followed.

Weitz & Luxenberg, in turn, typically gave Mr. Silver one-third of what it recovered in the cases, which totaled $3 million. Prosecutors have said that this arrangement was illegal, and that Mr. Silver was using his office for personal gain. A Newark criminal lawyer is following this story closely.

Dr. Taub, 79, is one of the government’s key witnesses in the trial of Mr. Silver, who has pleaded not guilty to fraud, extortion and money laundering charges. The government has alleged that Mr. Silver, 71, abused his position as one of the most powerful men in the state for personal gain, and in the case of Dr. Taub directed $500,000 of taxpayer money to him.

The doctor was a witness of contrasts. He came across as authoritative and passionate about treating mesothelioma, his life’s pursuit. He said he was one of only a few doctors in the world who specialized in treating mesothelioma, and estimated there are 3,000 new cases of the disease each year in the United States. “I’m put on this earth to help these people,” he said. “That’s what I want to do.”

At the same time, he acknowledged, he initially lied to federal investigators when they knocked on his door one day at 6 a.m. in the summer of 2014 and confronted him about his referrals to Mr. Silver.

“I was terrified and panicked, and I irrationally wanted to divorce myself” from the matter, Dr. Taub testified. Later, he said, he realized he had made a mistake and contacted investigators. Eventually, he said, he divulged everything he knew to the government, which reached a non-prosecution agreement in exchange for his cooperation.

Dr. Taub said he was introduced to Mr. Silver in the 1980s by a close friend, C. Daniel Chill, a lawyer who once served as counsel to a previous Assembly speaker, Stanley Steingut.

The doctor, in agreeing to refer patients to Mr. Silver at Weitz & Luxenberg, said he knew how valuable such cases could be for all involved, including Mr. Silver.

“I knew it would benefit his standing in the firm,” Dr. Taub said, acknowledging that it could also help him financially.

The doctor said that he made referrals to Mr. Silver for about a decade. He said he was unaware of Mr. Silver’s financial arrangements with Weitz & Luxenberg, but said Mr. Silver made it clear he was “pleased” at the referrals.

At some point, Dr. Taub was made aware he should send Mr. Silver a letter seeking state funding for his research program. Mr. Chill helped him draft the letter to the speaker, Dr. Taub testified.

After he sent that letter, the doctor said, the first state grant arrived.

Dr. Taub testified that Mr. Silver said at one point that he should not tell Mr. Chill about “any further referrals” made to the speaker.

“I didn’t know what to make of it actually,” Dr. Taub said. “He just wanted it kept between me and Mr. Silver, between me and him.”

Mr. Chill declined to comment.

In 2010, Dr. Taub began referring clients to another law firm that had agreed to provide significant financial backing for his research. Not long after, Mr. Silver visited Dr. Taub at his office at Columbia, and mentioned he was getting fewer referrals.

Dr. Taub said the two men parted on friendly terms and he kept sending referrals to Mr. Silver. “Just not as many,” the doctor told the jury.

During cross-examination on Wednesday, Mr. Silver’s lawyer, Steven F. Molo, asked Dr. Taub if he had “an explicit agreement to exchange patients for grants.”

“I did not,” he said.

Mr. Silver helped Dr. Taub in other ways. The doctor testified Mr. Silver arranged for him to be honored by New York State, helped get his son a job, and even offered to help him navigate red tape in organizing a mesothelioma run near the World Trade Center site, in Mr. Silver’s district.

“It will probably cost us,” Dr. Taub wrote in an email to another person involved in the run’s organization. “He is very good at getting people to owe him. But if he says he will deliver, he does.”

Walmex Under Fire

Story first appeared in USA Today.

Wal-Mart denied Wednesday that it pushed for changes to a federal anti-bribery law that it may have violated during an alleged bribery scheme in Mexico.

Wal-Mart has never lobbied on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Simply because Wal-Mart is a member of an organization does not mean we agree with every position they take.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA) received letters Wednesday from Reps. asking for information and documents related to Wal-Mart's efforts to lobby for changes to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

Top Wal-Mart executives serve on the boards of both organizations, which have lobbied against the act.

In a letter sent to the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Justice Department in February, RILA and the Chamber were among the groups expressing concerns about portions of the law, including inadequate definitions of foreign official.

They added that confusion about when the law applies has had a chilling effect on legitimate business activity.

Now, representatives are particularly concerned about whether Wal-Mart was involved in lobbying against the law at the same time top executives were aware of possibly having violated it.

Wal-Mart allegedly spent more than $24 million bribing Mexico officials to get construction permits to help expand its reach in what's now its largest foreign subsidiary, the New York Times reported on Sunday.

The case also involve multiple instances in which Walmart de Mexico executives allegedly concealed the bribes from the company's U.S. headquarters.

Once the bribes were brought to the attention of U.S. executives, a preliminary investigation that confirmed possible illegal activity was shut down, against the recommendation of Wal-Mart's lead investigator, a former FBI agent, the Times said.

The committee now overseeing Wal-Mart's own investigation into the allegations is comprised entirely of independent directors.


For more law related news, visit the Nation of Law blog.
For national and worldwide related business news, visit the Peak News Room blog.
For local and Michigan business related news, visit the Michigan Business News blog.
For healthcare and medical related news, visit the Healthcare and Medical blog.
For real estate and home related news, visit the  Commercial and Residential Real Estate blog.
For technology and electronics related news, visit the Electronics America blog.
For organic SEO and web optimization related news, visit the SEO Done Right blog.

Jury Pool quizzed about Politics at DeLay Trial

Associated Press

 

 

Potential jurors in the corruption trial of former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay were quizzed Tuesday about whether their political beliefs could interfere in their ability to make an impartial decision in the case.

Jury selection began Tuesday some five years after DeLay was indicted on charges he illegally funneled corporate money to help Republicans in Texas legislative races in 2002.

DeLay smiled and held the hand of his wife, Christine, as he entered a courthouse in Travis County earlier in the day.

"I feel great, absolutely great," said DeLay, one of the most polarizing politicians during former President George W. Bush's administration. "I'm not worried at all."

DeLay's attorneys tried to get his trial moved, fearing he could not get a fair trial in Austin, the most Democratic city in one of the most Republican states. DeLay has said the charges were politically motivated by Ronnie Earle, the Democratic former Travis County district attorney who originally brought the case and retired in 2008.

Gary Cobb, the lead prosecutor, told the jury pool his office has prosecuted all kinds of politicians, pointing out that a Democratic state lawmaker was being tried in an adjacent courthouse on Tuesday.

"Mr. DeLay is a Republican. I'm a Democrat. This case has nothing to do with that. All that matters is, 'Can you put political feelings you may have (aside) and give both sides a fair trial?'" Cobb said.

Most in the jury pool said they could be fair, but one man who said he was a Democrat doubted his own impartiality because of his "distaste for the Republican Party and the way they behave."

The jury was expected to be chosen from a group of nearly 90 people, part of an initial pool of 320 people. A jury could be chosen by late Tuesday, if not Wednesday.

Testimony in the case was set to begin Monday, the eve of Election Day, with the trial lasting at least three weeks.

DeLay, who has been pressing for a trial, says he committed no crime. His case was slowed down by appeals of pretrial rulings.

The 63-year-old DeLay is charged with two crimes: money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering. If convicted of money laundering, he faces from five years to life in prison. The conspiracy charge carries a prison term of two to 20 years. DeLay has chosen for the judge, not the jury, to sentence him if he's convicted.

DeLay and two associates - Jim Ellis and John Colyandro - are accused by prosecutors of taking $190,000 in corporate money collected by a state political action committee DeLay started and illegally funneling it through the Republican National Committee in Washington to help elect GOP state legislative candidates in 2002. Under Texas law, corporate money cannot be directly used for political campaigns.

In 2002, the GOP won a majority in the Texas House of Representatives for the first time since the Civil War era. That majority helped Republicans push through a congressional redistricting plan engineered by DeLay that sent more Texas Republicans to Congress in 2004.

Ellis and Colyandro, who face lesser charges, will be tried later. A previous charge alleging the three men had engaged in a conspiracy to violate campaign finance laws was dismissed.

DeLay was once one of the most powerful Republicans in Congress, earning the nickname "the Hammer" for his heavy-handed style.

The criminal charges in Texas, as well as a separate federal investigation of his ties to disgraced former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, forced DeLay to step down as majority leader and eventually to resign after representing suburban Houston for 22 years. The Justice Department has since ended its federal investigation into DeLay's ties to Abramoff without filing any charges against DeLay.

Since his indictment in 2005, DeLay has been mostly out of public view except for a stint competing on ABC's hit show "Dancing With the Stars." He withdrew after an injury. DeLay now runs a consulting firm based in the Houston suburb of Sugar Land.