Able Archer

Sharpe James guilty, headed to jail

Former Newark Mayor Sharpe James is guilty on all charges.

James will be sentenced in federal court on August 29.

James' co-defendant, Tamika Riley, was also found guilty on all counts.

Jurors reached the verdict this morning at the start of their sixth day of deliberations.

The trial started badly for James and got worse. The James indictment, actually a good read for graft buffs, can be read here.

Although I was obviously not privy to the jury's deliberations, my sense is that the case was sealed when the government showed Riley never would have been sold the land if she had not been having sex with James. The government also ably contradicted James' contention that the city council controlled land sales. While the council needed to formally approve the sales, the deals were made in the mayor's office.

—Douglas Carlucci

The James indictment

Here's a copy of the federal indictment of Sharpe James and Tamika Riley. I thought it would be good to post it in case anyone following the case wants to reference specifically with what the government is charging the ex-mayor.

United States of America v. Sharpe James and Tamika Riley (PDF, 148kb)

The present trial concerns the charges relating the city-owned land sold to Riley. James will be tried on the charges relating to fraudulent expenses after the current trial ends.

I will be back writing about the case tomorrow after a busy few days.

—Douglas Carlucci

Prosecutors show James' interest in land

Prosecutors introduced memos indicating ex-mayor Sharpe James had a strong, long-term interest in the sale of city land to developers:

Prosecutors showed more than a dozen of James' memos to the jury Wednesday. None mentioned Riley, but most showed that James was closely monitoring whether developers he was familiar with were getting a chance to buy city lots.

James met routinely with developers in his City Hall office, testified his longtime personal secretary, Rose Marie Posella. She couldn't specify the frequency, but said: "It wasn't on a regular daily basis."

Some of the memos showed that James was interested in staying behind the scenes on some development matters. He instructed Posella to compose one memo on plain paper, not mayoral letterhead, while in another he directed his business administrator and two redevelopment officials to ensure he received a "blind carbon copy" of items they sent to the council on city land sales. [Emphasis mine]

Three days into the trial, the contradictions in James’ defense are beginning to mount. He has relied on a blanket assertion that the City Council was responsible for land deals; however, the jury has now been presented several pieces of evidence to the contrary, including the memos and yesterday’s testimony by Diane Fuller Coleman. This evidence shows that while James' may be technically correct that the City Council was responsible for approving land sales, he sought to influence their decisions according to his will.

This will get worse if the judge allows evidence of James’ 2004 legislative fiat to wrest control of land sales from the City Council. (James’ attorneys made a motion to suppress this evidence. I do not know the judge’s ruling or if he has made one; I’ll find out tomorrow.) James’ reasoning that the 2004 law was necessary to prevent the City Council from making crooked land deals does not gibe with the mayor’s conduct, before or after he sponsored the law, or with the fact that the defense has sought to exclude the matter from the trial.

More tomorrow. I plan to report from the trial Friday.

Update

Here's the Star-Ledger's account of the testimony today.

James' defense does a pretty good job of tearing into the witness, a little old Italian lady who was the mayor's secretary for all of his twenty-year reign in city hall:

Defense lawyers [cited witness Rose Marie] Posella's testimony before the grand jury last May. Asked at that time when Riley first came to City Hall, Posella said, "That's hard for me. Let's see. I left in 2006. I think three or four years (ago). I'm not sure."

Thomas Ashley, James' lead attorney, repeatedly asked Posella about that statement.

"That was under oath, where you swore to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?" he asked.

"At the time, that was the truth," she replied.

Posella said that as she thought more about the issue in the months since, her memory was refreshed and her recollections changed.

Riley's defense counsel brought some dirt to court to suggest Posella was resentful of James:

Defense attorneys also sought to suggest Posella had an ax to grind with James. They said the FBI report stated Posella told agents she believed James was "extremely selfish" and did not treat her well at the end of their tenure at City Hall or come through with a promised raise to boost her pension.

Posella testified yesterday that the FBI report was taken out of context. She acknowledged she asked James for a raise and said he granted such increases to imminent retirees on a "regular" basis to increase their pensions.

She said James did give her a raise, though he did not put her at the top of the salary range for her position, as she had requested.

"I was perfectly satisfied with that," she said.

Posella is due back on the stand today.

All of this occurred after prosecutors brought in the memos, which showed James'

Prosecutors introduced more than a dozen documents yesterday as they sought to illustrate James was intimately involved in development matters in Newark. Riley was not mentioned in any of them.

One document, dated Jan. 17, 2006, tells city officials how to divide city land. "LT Associates was promised 20 lots, not seven," the memo said. "We must correct the above as quickly as possible."

Posella said James ordered her to type the memo, but on blank paper instead of mayoral stationary. He also told her to state the memo was from "The Neighborhood Committee." Posella said she had never heard of such an organization.

If this is right, then this happened well after James' 2004 Senate bill became law and overruled a 15-year-old court decision against the mayor so he could control land sales. I suppose this is why he instructed Posella to write that memo on nonofficial stationery; he was trying to provide some third-party legitimacy to the land deals he recommended to the council for approval.

It seems from this report the prosecution is having trouble establishing the time line, particularly getting all the evidence to line up and link his land-sales power and his relationship to Riley. I wish the Ledger would report on what's the judge's decision on evidence related to the 2004 bill, as well as the content of those eleven other memos. It could be he hasn't decided, I'm not sure of the schedule for something like that. I will find out, probably on Friday because I won't be around much tomorrow.

—Douglas Carlucci

Bad day in court for Sharpe James

Sharpe James’ defense was delivered two blows yesterday in the ex-mayor’s federal corruption trial.

Diane Fuller Coleman, the director of a Jersey City social services agency, testified that James’ co-defendant, Tamika Riley, told her she could get land for free from the city through her connections to James. Coleman, Riley and a third woman planned to use the land to establish a social services center.

"We were under the impression that it wasn't going to cost us anything to get these properties," Coleman testified.

"And who gave you that impression?" asked Special U.S. Attorney Perry Primavera.

"Tamika," Coleman replied.

Under cross-examination by defense attorney Thomas Ashley, Coleman acknowledged that no one at City Hall ever "guaranteed" she would get the properties. She said Riley once showed her a letter from the mayor's office, addressed to "Tamika" and signed "Sharpe."

"It was personal," Coleman said. "It made me feel that we had a definite commitment."

But she acknowledged she never saw any letters in which James or other officials promised to help Riley in land deals.

Later, James’ longtime personal secretary, Rose Marie Posella, testified that the ex-major was in a close relationship with Riley, calling her a “girlfriend.” While both defense teams have implicitly acknowledged such a relationship, they have said James did not give Riley special treatment; Posella’s testimony seems to contradict this:

It eventually became apparent, Posella said, that Riley, a young businesswoman and publicist, was somebody who should get insider access to James.

Posella said she recalled Riley once calling on James' direct line, a number only few people, such as his wife, were supposed to have. After time, when Riley called, the secretary said she would interrupt the mayor in meetings for her calls because Posella knew James would take them.

"It was my impression that he saw her socially. Well, it was, it was uh, common knowledge among the staff members that Tamika and the mayor were very close and very friendly and had a very close social relationship," Posella said.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Judith Germano asked Posella her impression of the relationship.

"My impression was that Tamika Riley was a girlfriend of the mayor. Based on my observations, his interest in her," she said.

Defense attorneys will cross-examine Posella tomorrow.

While neither witness was devastating to the defense, James has relied on the idea that his and Riley's relationship was part of his business-as-usual at City Hall. Both witnesses contradict this basic premise; as far back as 2000, Riley seemed to be under the impression that Newark's municipal land was hers for the taking. Coleman did not testify that Riley said she could use her connections in Newark to get a good deal; she said Riley asserted the land could be had for free. She was either terribly delusional about her relationship with James, or James was sweet-talking Riley, with a little exagerration, about the deals he would eventually help her set up.

—Douglas Carlucci

Sharpe James trial starts in Newark

After the federal judge dismissed two jurors, lawyers presented their opening arguments in Sharpe James' corruption trial yesterday.

Prosecutors accused James of abusing his office by arranging for the city to sell nine parcels of land to his former girlfriend and co-defendant, Tamika Riley, for well-below market price. Prosecutors say Riley then resold the properties for significant profit:

"This case is about fraud, favoritism and concealment," Kwon told jurors as James' trial began in a federal courtroom a block from the City Hall he dominated for two decades. "And, ordinarily, what Sharpe James and Tamika Riley did in their personal lives is their business. But when Sharpe James used his office and used city-owned properties to foster and maintain his romantic involvement with Tamika Riley, he gave up that privilege to keep that his business." …

During more than three hours of opening arguments, attorneys dropped clues to the parade of witnesses whom the jury of seven men and five women will hear: police officers, city council members, maybe even a pro athlete or a hip-hop mogul. The former mayor's personal secretary, Rose Marie Posella, was expected to take the stand today.

No one challenged prosecutors' claim of a romance between Riley and James. But Ashley and Riley's attorney, Gerald Krovatin, tried to downplay its significance. "That is not a crime," Ashley said.

For prosecutors, it was the linchpin, suggesting the quid pro quo motive behind the fraud. Using a simple color-coded chart, Kwon walked jurors through transactions for nine parcels slated for redevelopment that Riley bought from the city between 2001 and 2005. She paid $46,000 for the properties and resold them -- in some cases, only weeks later -- for $665,000.

James’ and Riley's attorneys say no crime occurred:

According to James' attorney Thomas Ashley, however, Riley got the same opportunities at the same rate as other aspiring developers from a mayor trying to restore a downtrodden city.

"That was Sharpe James resurrecting the South Ward from scratch," Ashley told the jury. "And Sharpe James did not receive a dime. There are no kickbacks, there are no schemes, ladies and gentlemen, there are no hidden financial interests." …

Ashley said he would show jurors a list of people who, like Riley, had no previous real estate experience but were approved for Newark development deals.

"Certainly what we have here is Sharpe James doing business in the way that mayors do business," Ashley said. "He was not a crook and he was not corrupt and his alleged relationship with Tamika Riley will not change that legacy, because that legacy lives in the houses that you see when you ride through the city of Newark."

According to the Star-Ledger, the two jurors were dismissed because the judge thought they would be unable to devout enough time to the trial:

"This is serious business requiring serious civic-minded people to commit to it," U.S. District Judge William Martini sternly reminded the panel this morning. "This is not a part-time thing."

Attorneys and the judge had spent last week whittling a pool of 247 prospective jurors to the seven men, five women and seven alternates they hoped would sit for the two- to three-month trial. After settling on the panel and dismissing the rest, two jurors told Martini that they might have a scheduling conflict that would keep them from serving.

The judge and attorneys spent much of this morning trying to resolve the issue. Just before 11 a.m., they decided to release the two jurors, and look for replacements among 11 prospective jurors who had been called the courthouse.

The Star-Ledger’s account of the opening day can be found here; the AP’s here. Politicker NJ has probably the best summary of the first day of the trial here. Reporter Max Pizarro picks out a detail both the Ledger and the AP skimmed over:

Arguing on behalf of James, 72, defense attorney Tom Ashley said it was a Newark City Council top-heavy with James detractors, including the mayor's arch-nemesis Cory Booker, that repeatedly affirmed the sale of city properties to Riley.

Last week, there were reports James' attorneys would call Booker to testify. James' attorneys also asked the judge to suppress evidence of James' support for a peculiar 2004 Senate bill that gave him power over Newark land sales.

During his successful mayoral bid, Booker repeatedly criticized James for selling city land at cut-rate prices to friendly developers—which makes Riley's attorney's argument that she was "as qualified as anyone" worth a cringe. Booker even won a court injunction that prevented the exiting mayor from making any more such sales, stopping Riley from making another cut-rate deal with the city:

Last year, the council approved two more land sales in April and a third in June, but then Mayor-elect Cory Booker won a court injunction halting hers and other transactions. One of those aborted deals would have enabled Riley's company to buy her Renaissance Towers basement complex for $500,000.

The property is a block from the professional hockey arena due to open later this year. In an interview, Theodore Lamicella Jr., project manager for Certified Valuations, which conducted a citywide property revaluation in 2002, said the property is worth $1 million.

Booker has been consistent in his opposition to the sort of "development" in which James' attorneys contend their client was supporting in Newark. From a December 2006 Star-Ledger report on the Booker administration's new land-sales regulations:

Claiming Newark has squandered millions of dollars selling surplus land too cheaply, Mayor Cory Booker will soon propose new policy for selling municipal property that he says will bring greater value to the city.

Booker said that builders wanting to buy vacant lots and buildings from the city will have to pay market rates, or agree to include low- and moderate-income housing in the development or make other improvements to the neighborhood. ...

"After the people of Newark, our most valuable asset is the land we own," Booker said. "We're going to switch from giving away land to close friends, campaign contributors and outsiders to one that utilizes minority developers within the city." ...

At issue is a policy that allows the city to sell lots at bargain prices in order to entice developers to blighted neighborhoods. Land was sold under the James administration for anywhere from $1 to $4 per square foot -- far below market value. (A Star-Ledger survey in 2005 found the average sale of privately owned vacant land in Newark was $29.50 per square foot.) [Emphasis mine]

James' case seems particularly weak, especially if the judge allows prosecutors to present evidence of James support for the 2004 bill, as he should. If James was just going about business as usual and the council members were making "redevelopment" deals just as he was, why did James need to change state law—and not simply tweak the code, but override a 15-year-old Superior Court decision? From the statement attached to the original bill:

This bill is specifically intended to overrule the holding in Council of the City of Newark v. James, 232 N.J.Super. 449 (App. Div. 1989), which asserted that the statutes authorizing the public sale of real property, by resolution or ordinance, assigned to the city council and not to the mayor, of municipalities operating under the mayor-council plan, the choice of what properties to sell and the conditions of the sale. It is more consistent with the mayor-council plan to recognize the authority of the mayor, as the chief executive officer of the municipality, to initiate those land purchase and sale decisions and determine the terms and conditions for acquisition and sale, upon approval by council, rather than to cut the mayor out of the process. [Emphasis mine]

At the time, James argued the bill was necessary because council members were making inappropriate deals. Yet, Riley bought her property from the city between the years of 2001-2005. Could it have been that in 2004, the council, seeing the end of James' reign, started to question the land deals he asked the council to approve, and, in a pique, the mayor used his leverage as a State Senator to regain control of the city's cash cow, unused land? James attorneys might be in a position to argue the council was complicit in his corruption, but that's hardly a defense for the corruption itself.

Based on the outline of his defense strategy I've gleaned so far—and assuming the judge doesn't suppress the prosecution's evidence on the 2004 bill—it seems James is in a very weak position.

More later.

Update: More crooks in high places, brought low

Former State Senator Joe Coniglio entered a plea of not guilty to corruption charges in federal court Thursday morning.

Coniglio is accussed of accepting a no-show "consulting" contract with Hackensack University Medical Center in return for directing state money to the hospital. Prosecutors say the hospital paid Coniglio, a Democrat formerly representing Paramus, $103,000 between 2004 and 2006; in return, Coniglio brought the hospital about $10 million in state funding.

—Douglas Carlucci

Jury seated in Sharpe James trial

Prosecutors and defense attorneys have agreed to a jury for the corruption trial of former Newark mayor and state senator Sharpe James.

On Thursday, James’ attorneys sought to suppress evidence related to his conduct as a state senator. Prosecutors planned to present taped statements James made in support of a 2004 Senate bill.

The peculiar bill was to function as a legislative fiat overruling a judicial decision against James. New Jersey Superior Court ruled in 1989, in Council of the City of Newark v. James, that under Newark’s mayor-council government, the council and not the mayor has the power to chose what municipal land to sell and the terms of the sale. The bill would change the law to say the council could only approve land sales presented by the mayor.

The bill passed with some modifications and became law in July 2004. The version of the bill approved by General Assembly and signed by the governor limited the effect of the law to municipalities with populations over 265,000. Newark is the only city of this size in New Jersey, with a population of about 280,000.

Prosecutors allege that James urged passage of Senate Bill 967 so he could increase his power to illegally benefit himself and political associates and that the tapes will help them prove this motivation, according to a brief filed Thursday by Alan Zegas, one of James' lawyers.

Attorneys for James argue that he was acting properly in his capacity as a senator and should enjoy immunity for those actions.

(The version of the bill James sponsored in the Senate can be seen here; the law that was passed can be seen here.)

Federal investigators subpoenaed the Statehouse last year for records on the bill. According to this Star-Ledger report from the time, James told fellow Democrats he would block the state budget if his bill was not passed.

—Douglas Carlucci

Sharpe James on trial, part one

Newark Mayor Cory Booker might be called to testify at former Mayor Sharpe James' trial.

James is accused of helping his alleged mistress, Tamika Riley, buy municipal land for well below market price. Riley quickly sold the land on the market, taking a huge profit. She is a co-defendant with James in the trial.

James' defense attorneys will argue that it was not the mayor but the City Council, of which Cory Booker was a member, that controlled the sale of city land.

The defense team may call Booker because as a councilman, he voted to authorize some of those land sales, said Alan Zegas, one of James' attorneys.

Booker voted with Councilmen Augusto Amador and Luis Quintana on March 20, 2002, to sell three properties to Riley for $18,000, according to city records. It remains unclear whether Amador and Quintana also will be asked to testify.

The resolution approving the sale said an investigation determined Riley had the proper qualifications and financial resources to acquire the properties and develop them. The resolution also called for Riley to "undertake the substantial rehabilitation" of the properties before reselling them at market-rate prices.

Riley sold the properties - without rehabilitating them - for $80,000, a profit of $62,000 in a month, according to the indictment against her and James.

Booker said he had not been asked to testify, nor had be been interviewed by federal prosecutors. He said he has had no involvement with the case since his administration complied with a subpoena for James' records. ...

Booker, despite his vote to approve the sale of property to Riley, was a critic of the discounted land program when he challenged James in 2002, arguing it favored the politically connected. After he was elected, he successfully sued the city to freeze the sales.

Booker also gave momentum to the FBI investigation into James, the Star-Ledger has previously reported. Shortly after his inauguration in 2006, Booker called U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie to tell him about bills for credit cards issued in James' name that had arrived at city offices, according to two law enforcement sources familiar with the conversation.

Judge William J. Martini is having a hard time gathering jurors, according to the New York Times:

“We have surveys that show that 53 percent of the public thinks that he’s guilty even though they haven’t heard the evidence,” Thomas R. Ashley, one of Mr. James’s lawyers, said in an interview as jury selection began.

Judge Martini expressed concern that so many jurors questioned their ability to be impartial, but noted that some of them also checked “yes” to Question 37, saying they could follow the law according to his instructions. So when Judge Martini starts questioning potential jurors individually on Wednesday, he plans to ask whether the questionnaire was poorly worded or the issues and public officials involved in Mr. James’s trial are truly that divisive.

Prosecutors have charged in an indictment that Mr. James, 72, used his connections to allow the companion, Tamika Riley, to purchase steeply discounted parcels of city land that she later sold at a profit of more than $700,000, often without fulfilling her obligation to improve the property.

Many Newark residents credit Mr. James with beginning the revitalization of downtown and, in his final years, a boom in residential development that saw hundreds of new houses replace vacant lots and dilapidated slums. As the city’s second black mayor, Mr. James has also been praised as a tireless, occasionally bombastic, advocate for racial justice.

But the former mayor’s blunt personality and taste for yachts and luxury cars also made him no shortage of enemies.

His administration was investigated in the mid-1990s after hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations to the Sharpe James Civic Association could not be accounted for, and although Mr. James was never charged, he came to be viewed by many as a symbol of the politician on the take.

Because federal court draws potential jurors from across North Jersey, Mr. James’s fate will likely be decided by a cross section of the demographics and divergent opinions found there.

More soon.

—Douglas Carlucci