Late last month, the NY Times reported that defense lawyers for State Senator John Sampson argued that although "guilty" of embezzlement (for purposes of their legal motion), Sampson cannot be prosecuted because the statute of limitations had expired before his indictment.
What a crock of bullsh!t!
According to the Times:
"State Senator John L. Sampson, who handily won his primary last month despite being under indictment, returned to court on Thursday [September 23] to seek dismissal of two of the 10 counts against him.His lawyers did not argue that he did not embezzle from the government, but rather that he did it earlier than prosecutors have said.
The issue, laid out before Judge Dora L. Irizarry of Federal District Court in Brooklyn, hinged on what action constituted embezzlement: Mr. Sampson’s transfer of the money, or his use of it?
Federal prosecutors have accused Mr. Sampson of embezzling funds from sales of foreclosed properties, which he was overseeing as a state court-appointed administrator of foreclosure funds. He is also charged with obstruction of justice, witness tampering, evidence tampering and making false statements."
[Insert Photograph] Senator John L. Sampson MICHAEL NAGLE FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES
"Mr. Sampson’s lawyers argued on Thursday that the five-year statute of limitations on the embezzlement charges expired well before he was indicted.
Mr. Sampson was supposed to promptly return surplus money from the sale of two foreclosed Brooklyn properties to the New York State Supreme Court, according to the indictment. He did not. The defense agreed, for the purposes of the motion, that the embezzlement took place in 1998 and 2002, when Mr. Sampson transferred the money to escrow accounts he controlled."
Read more: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/10/24/nyregion/in-senators-case-defining-embezzlement.html
Michael Benjamin, a consultant and freelance contributor for the NY Post and City and State NY, is a former state legislator.
