The Biggest Corruption Story You Didn't Read

A sharp reader caught something in the El Paso Times today that I missed.  It's story of a man named Brady... Not really.  It's the Adrian Pena/Joe Gallegos/Sal Mena story that you know nothing about and its monumentally bigger/worse than anything Gilbert Sanchez and Luther Jones ever did.

Read the article HERE.  It's not really an "article," it's a blurb.  It should have been front page news.  It's a million times bigger and dirtier than the corruption scandal they're covering like it's the OJ trial.  But... since it's construction and it's hard to figure out unless you're in the business, it goes basically unreported.

The crux of this case is the fact that it involved a very high level of coordination between school board members, EPISD staff, architects, suppliers and contractors.  The fix was in from top to bottom and YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT!  

It's the biggest crime you'll never care about. 

Comments

[Maria]

It's the same construction players involved in the County Parking Garage. Except at that time Adrian Pena was working for Paco Jordan but the moves and the inside game and the payoffs were the same.

Different Commissioners involved in the voting of that particular bid? I think the next step in the corruption trial is going to bring this particular matter to light, those players will be going to trial next April.

[Carl Starr]

I remember the case and your right...to me Jones is not guilty of honest services fraud, he is only guilty of overly seeking power and influence and thats not illegal! To the extent the prosecutors tied honest services to mail/wire fraud is the chances of winning on appeal, as we know SCOTUS recently greatly weakened honest services re Enron and many cirs are saying that applys to public corruption too....in other words the u.s. attys would have been better to have brought a straight mail fraud charge and left out honest services.

[Maria]

Carl, I alway appreciate your dedication and research in law and opinions that run on point or close to point in many case scenarios. Your bias towards some individuals do tend to cloud your reasoning.

When you spend years working among the politicos as an everyday lay person, you realize that whatever it took, whatever application the US Attorney applied on what some people perceive as success, was downright evil, greedy, manipulative, and unfair. To make money by giving and calling in what was owed was plain not the ethical way to go.

You really need to close up your pop tent out there in the Gilas and start working wtih the everyday person to understand why so many people today at the Courthouse, thanked the Lord this lenten season for bringing evil to justice.

It's not going to end the back door good ole boy dealings, but hopefully it will scare the crap out of them for at least six (6) months.

Whatever it took for the United States vs. Jones and Sanchez to succeed, I hope the same is accomplished with Gandara, Medina, Escobar, Teran, Cobos, etc....so on and so on and so on....

[Thomas]

Carl
I think Jones will walk on appeal on at least part of the charges.Cannot make the case for Sanchez.As you know and I know money and high end lawyers can tilt the playing field of what is call justice in the U.S..

[chucky]

this was a pretty big corruption scandal in the making also. but nothing will ever happen.

http://www.elpasoinc.com/readArticle.aspx?issueid=334&xrec=6364

[diane]

Let's hope this sticks or the next..Access..or the Special Ed..Luther had his hands in too many to name..Maybe more guilty pleas? so as not to air the dirty laundry?

[Carl Starr]

I dont think I am bias Maria...I mean I usually can find cases to support any side or view, its a battle of case law and facts, on the other hand I know the law is also a knife...I merely pointed out that honest services charge is weak since scotus case...I am saying if the honest sevices charge was tied too tight to the mail fraud charge then Jones may walk on Appeal, I mean if the man had all the time and many to inflence public policy then imangine what he could do for freedom from a cage. My two cents is the u.s. atty would have been better to just have brought a straight mail fraud charge alone, a charge known amoung prosecutors as that 'old Colt 45' for its adaptabilty and simplicity.

[Maria]

Perhaps your right Carl, side by side the charges may just offset each other. I think that based on that probability that the Judge should impose his 90 day sentencing rule, so that it expires a couple of weeks before the September trial that these two still need to face. This way he holds the dynamic duo over for trial without the probability of bail, or forces Jones to deed over all of his millions for the possibility to return to society and walk with everyone as a poor pauper and to many he will be the plagued leeper, that in itself would be punishment in its own for Jones ego, if their appeal should succeed.

Either way its a done deal for the life they both lead and the reputation they both enjoyed for tooo long.

What he can do from a cage will be limited once his entire money is compromised, which is why I believe the Judge froze their assets. Well with Sanchez, his pair of undies.

[court watcher]

scotus decision on honest services in the Skilling (Enron) appeal was sent back to 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. They still upheld the charges against Skilling and did not address the scotus/honest services. So no, its not settled law yet. This just happened in the last few weeks.

[Carl Starr]

Thanks for the update court watcher...before Jones was indicted there was already indications growing that scotus was going to clip honest services...the day he was indicted last year I was surprised to see the honest services charge.

A honest services charge like RICO may be sexy etc and seems closer to 'public corruption' for the public media but firstly 'good state government' is a state right/duty not federal, old mail fraud is not as sexy but proven reliable over the years via many lost appeals, the mails as federal is undisputed. Any scheme to defraud.

[Armchair]

Carl Starr, arm-chair attorney...

You need to go back and reread the SCOTUS opinion for Skilling and then answer this simple question: Did the government prove that bribery and kickbacks were involved in Jones' and Sanchez's conspiracy to defraud El Paso County and its citizens?

[Carl Starr]

The arguement re honest services is also based on states rights ie that firstly 'good state government' is a state duty, thus the arguement goes that the feds were overreaching with a vague law thus before Skilling the 5th cir ruled 'unless rooted in state law the federal honest services law 'has no purchase'". Here Jones was not charged under the federal bribery statue and further the indictment did not fully cite and meet the Texas Bribery Statue. Here there is no "bag man" no clear quid pro quo. Just the unversal practice [until we have public funded elections like 8 states have...]that when you give a donation it is usually in hopes of some general favorable treatment...especially persons with 'status, power and influenece'.