« "State budget cuts clog criminal justice system" | Main | Another notable review of "The Collapse of American Criminal Justice" »

October 26, 2011

Corrupt lobbyist gets prison term 20 months instead of the 20 years first sought by feds

As detailed in this AP report, a "former lobbyist who was a rising star under Jack Abramoff's tutelage was sentenced Wednesday to nearly two years in prison for giving public officials meals and event tickets."  Here are the particulars, which suggest some measure of sentencing equity prevailed in this case:

Kevin Ring argued up until his emotional sentencing hearing that he was operating in a corrupt Washington environment controlled by people with money and that he did not break the law.  "I found a ridiculous system full of gray areas and I manipulated it," a sobbing Ring told the judge in asking her not to lock him up.  It was the first time he spoke about the charges in court after three years of prosecution, including two trials in which he decided not to testify.

U.S. District Ellen Segal Huvelle said Ring's conduct was not nearly as egregious as ringleader Abramoff or some of the others involved in a scandal that resulted in stricter lobbying rules in Washington.  But the judge gave Ring a sentence of 20 months, one of the stiffest terms among the 21 defendants in the investigation.  Most others involved cooperated with prosecutors and got plea deals that avoided prison.

Huvelle said she had to order prison "to respect the jury's verdict and promote respect for the law."  Ring has 14 days to appeal, and the judge said he could remain free pending the outcome.

Ring, a 41-year-old father of two from Kensington, Md., was convicted after two trials of five felony counts including conspiracy, payment of a gratuity and honest services wire fraud.  The first jury couldn't agree on his guilt so he had a second trial that led to his conviction in November 2010.

Prosecutor Nathaniel Edmonds asked the judge for four years imprisonment, saying a sentence without jail would invite future offenders.  He said Ring's showering of gifts on public officials "is not business as usual in Washington — that is a crime."

The Justice Department initially suggested a 17-year to 22-year sentencing guidelines range for Ring.  Huvelle rejected that and suggested it appeared to justify Ring's suggestion that he was being retaliated against for exercising his constitutional right to trial.

Ring claimed in a letter to the judge that prosecutors charged him in a 10-count indictment after he refused to accuse his former boss, ex-Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif., of being corrupted by his gifts.  "Saying these things would have been a flat-out lie," Ring said.

Prosecutors deny he was pressured to lie and say he was offered a plea deal to admit his guilt without being required to testify against Doolittle or anyone else.  "Unfortunately for Ring, 12 jurors decided beyond a reasonable doubt that Ring did have the intent to corrupt public officials, including Congressman Doolittle," the prosecutors wrote....

Huvelle said she did not consider Ring's conduct as nearly bad as that of Abramoff and his business partner, Michael Scanlon, who bilked their American Indian tribal clients out of $20 million in fees, or former Rep. Bob Ney, who accepted golf and gambling trips, tickets to sporting events, free meals and campaign donations.

She also noted that unlike those three, Ring did not benefit financially from his crimes but instead helped enrich his clients.  She noted that the case has left Ring in financial ruin with more than $2 million in legal fees and that he went from making $600,000 at the height of his lobbying career in 2003 to now making $5,000 a month working for two nonprofits.

But Abramoff, Scanlon and Ney all reached plea agreements with prosecutors that helped cut their sentences while Ring fought at trial.  His sentence ranks with theirs — Abramoff got 48 months, Ney 30 months and Scanlon also was sentenced to 20 months.

Related recent posts:

October 26, 2011 at 04:33 PM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e20153929a8ad6970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Corrupt lobbyist gets prison term 20 months instead of the 20 years first sought by feds:

Comments

hmm typical example of american NO justice!

"The first jury couldn't agree on his guilt so he had a second trial that led to his conviction in November 2010."

again with the illegal do-overs!

then the state compounds the error!

"Ring claimed in a letter to the judge that prosecutors charged him in a 10-count indictment after he refused to accuse his former boss, ex-Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif., of being corrupted by his gifts. "Saying these things would have been a flat-out lie," Ring said.

Prosecutors deny he was pressured to lie and say he was offered a plea deal to admit his guilt without being required to testify against Doolittle or anyone else. "Unfortunately for Ring, 12 jurors decided beyond a reasonable doubt that Ring did have the intent to corrupt public officials, including Congressman Doolittle," the prosecutors wrote...."

got to love em or shoot em!

so they try to blackmail him to turn on others then punish him for demanding his legal constutional RIGHT to a trial...then lie about the jury to the judge...never mentioning it was the ILLEGAL SECOND one who of course found for the state!

Posted by: rodsmith | Oct 26, 2011 5:53:34 PM

20 months seems too light of a punishment for this type of activity...
I think the 17-22 year assessment was more accurate.
Borderline bribery should be punished more stiffly than this.
If we don't punish it harder, nothing will stop it from happening more often in the future.

Posted by: Fort Worth Lawyer | Feb 13, 2012 4:44:05 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB