A federal choose on Wednesday denied former Sen. Bob Menendez’s (D-N.J.) bid to toss his corruption conviction and obtain a brand new trial as a result of jurors throughout their deliberations had entry to trial reveals with out correct redactions.
Menendez and the 2 businessmen tried alongside him, Wael Hana and Fred Daibes, latched onto the revelation within the hopes that it might compel wiping the jury’s responsible verdict.
“Because the defendants have waived any objection to the improperly redacted contents of the laptop and its submission to the jury and because the defendants were not prejudiced by the improperly redacted material, defendants’ supplemental motions for a new trial are denied,” U.S. District Choose Sidney Stein, who oversaw the trial, wrote in his 14-page ruling.
The U.S. Lawyer’s Workplace for the Southern District of New York, which prosecuted Menendez, declined to remark. The Hill has reached out to Menendez’s authorized group for remark.
Following a nine-week trial, a New York jury in July convicted Menendez on all 16 felony counts, together with bribery and appearing as a overseas agent. The previous chair of the Senate Overseas Relations Committee resigned the next month and is about to be sentenced on Jan. 29, when federal prosecutors are searching for to imprison him for 15 years.
In November, prosecutors revealed that 9 reveals offered to jurors on a laptop computer throughout their deliberations displayed materials that ought to have been redacted. Prosecutors acknowledged the error however insisted the convictions ought to nonetheless stand.
Stein, an appointee of former President Clinton, agreed by ruling the defendants shared duty for submitting the correct reveals. Menendez and the businessmen didn’t object earlier than the laptop computer was despatched to the deliberation room, the choose famous.
“Indeed, if these exhibits were as critical as Menendez now claims, surely they would have been amongst the ‘select number of exhibit files’… that the defense read during its review of the laptop, but they were either not read by the defense or the error was not noticed,” Stein wrote.
And even when Menendez might nonetheless object, the choose mentioned he wouldn’t be entitled to a brand new trial as a result of there was solely an “infinitesimal chance” the jurors even seen the mistakenly despatched supplies. The proof in query wasn’t “a smoking gun laying in plain view,” anyhow, the choose dominated.
“The extra-record material was a few phrases buried in thousands of exhibits and many thousands of pages of evidence. All defense counsel as well as the government attorneys—acutely attuned to the evidence in this case—failed to notice the improper redactions during their preparation and review of the jury laptop, and for a full four months thereafter,” Stein wrote.
