Oklahoma Criminal Defense Blog

Stephen Caracappa and Louis Eppolito were convicted three years before of acting as assassins for the Mafia while they were employed by New York Police Department.    Finally, [in March, 2009] they were sentenced in Brooklyn by U.S. District Court by Judge Jack Weinstein, Eppolito to life plus 100 years with a fine of $4.75 million, Caracappa to life plus 80 years and a fine of $4.25 million.

The judge said the two defendants likely had hidden assets to pay the fines.  One asset that will not be seized, however, is their police pensions.  Both men have been drawing tax-free disability pensions from the City of New York since they left the police department.  Caracappa retired in 1992 as a first-grade detective.  He receives $5,313 a month.  Eppolito retired in 1990 as a second-grade detective and receives a $3,896 per month in pension.

Both detectives, who joined the police force in 1969, retired before they were charged with anything, so their convictions do not interrupt their pensions from the city.  Although first reports of the detective’s corruption surfaced in 1979, they continued to receive promotions in the police department.  Implicated a  number of times, they were never charged until in this prosecution.  The pensions are not subject to seizure for the fines due the federal government.

Under New York law, pensions due former public employees are treated as property in trust for the employee. Efforts to exact forfeiture of such pensions as penalty for those convicted of corruption have failed in the past.  In 2009, 450 corrupt former officials, judges and police officers were reportedly still receiving pensions despite their convictions.

Caracappa, now 68 years old, is gaunt, with little color in his face.  Eppolito is 61 and doing better but still a wreck.   They will have little opportunity to spend their pensions in prison, but their families can.  The testimony of the families of some of their victims at the sentencing hearing did not prompt either of the men to give up their pensions.

Caracappa’s and Eppolito’s trial [in 2006?] lasted 3 weeks.  It was built around the testimony of Burton Kaplan, a wholesale garment dealer who was involved in a number of schemes with people in organized crime.  Jimmy Breslin wrote a book about Kaplan, entitled “The Good Rat, ” which describes how Caracappa, using a police computer, helped track down a man named Nicholas Guido for the Mafia.  Caracappa made a mistake, however, and gave a wrong address with the same name, who was soon shot to death.

Caracappa’s and Eppolito were charged with accepting $4,000 a month payments from the mob for spying, plus tens of thousands extra for the occasional kidnapping or murder.  They disclosed the identities of witnesses and leaked information, compromising investigations.  In their first mob killing in 1986, they used the siren on their unmarked car to pull over a jeweler on a Long Island road.  They told Israel Greenwald they needed him to stand in a lineup to investigate a traffic accident.  Then they drove him to a garage, where he was shot to death.

At their trial, the detectives were convicted of murdering a capo in the Gambino family capo in his Mercedes-Benz on the Belt Parkway in New York.  The jury also found them guilty of kidnaping a man, putting him in the trunk of their car, and delivering him to a mobster, who then tortured the man for hours before killing him.

Following the trial in which they were convicted of racketeering conspiracy, the trial judge issued but did not impose a life sentence for each detective.  The judge stated he believed the five-year statute of limitations had run on the crimes the defendants had committed and therefore overturned the convictions.  The most serious crimes of which the two detectives were accused occurred in Brooklyn, including murders, in the 1980s and 1990s, prosecutors used more recent and less serious crimes, such as money-laundering and dope distribution in Las Vegas, Nevada, in 2004-2005, to bring the earlier acts into the conspiracy net as an ongoing criminal enterprise.  The judge did not believe the conspiracy could include the earlier acts, but the United States Court of Appeals differed and reinstated the convictions.

A very big Mexican drug kingpin was sentenced in Houston to a 25-year sentence.  The sentencing hearing was done in a closed courtroom.  Osiel Cardenas Guillen was the head of the “Gulf Cartel” until his arrest by Mexican authorities in 2007.  He pled guilty to five counts of a lengthy indictment, which included drug trafficking, money laundering and the attempted murder and assault of federal agents.  He also forfeited $50 million in assets to the U.S. Government.

The Gulf Cartel controls much of the cocaine traffic across the Mexican-American border in South Texas.  Cardenas was responsible for “kidnapings, extortion, gun battles in the streets,” according to U.S. District Judge Hilda Tagle, who sentenced Cardenas.

Nevertheless, Judge Tagle followed the recommendation of the U.S. Attorney in giving the sentence because Cardenas was cooperating with the government in pursuing other drug traffickers.

Before he was arrested by Mexican authorities in 2003, Cardenas ran an empire of drug smugglers and gunmen in Tamaulipas, Mexico.  They moved tons of cocaine every year into the United States.  He was famous to law enforcement on both sides of the border for the vicious violence he employed against his enemies. He recruited former military commandoes as his gunmen, known as Zetas.
Even after his arrest, he continued to direct the operations of his cartel from his Mexican jail cell.  Then Mexican President Felipe Calderon broke with previous policy and extradited Cardenas along with 14 other major figures from the Mexican underworld.  Cardenas began cooperating with the U.S. Government immediately when he arrived here.  Meanwhile, his former organization has been weakened by arrests and lack of leadership.

The Zetas have now broken off from the Gulf Cartel. They have become a separate criminal enterprise that controls the crossing at Laredo, Texas, and recently there has been a series of gun battles between the Zetas and what is left of the Gulf Cartel in the towns along the Texas border in a contest for turf.

Cardenas has been in the United States for two years, cooperating with law enforcement all the time, perhaps especially cooperating on the Zetas, since they have split with his Gulf Cartel.  Finally, his sentence was handed down in a courtroom, closed to the public.  Judge Tagle also sealed dozens of documents related to Cardenas’ plea agreement and descriptions of his assets, all at the request of government prosecutors.  It is not unusual to seal documents in a case, but it is very unusual to lock a courtroom for a hearing in a United States Courthouse.

The sentencing hearing was attended by two members of Cardenas family and some law enforcement officers, along with armed guards.  The hearing was not even on the court’s published docket until hours after it was over.   The transcript taken of the hearing reflects that the judge explained the United States Marshal’s Service had asked to keep the public from witnessing the hearing because it would jeopardize Cardenas’ safety.  The affidavit detailing that request was sealed.  Judge Tagle stated that if she opened the hearing, the “defendant, court personnel, United States marshal personnel, other courthouse personnel and the general public will be placed in imminent danger.”

William Jefferson, former Congressman from New Orleans, was sentenced to 13 years in federal prison for using his office to enrich himself and his family.  His sentence was less than the 27 years recommended by the U.S. Attorney.  He was convicted by a jury last August for bribery, racketeering and money laundering.  Some of his schemes involved business ventures in Africa.

Since Jefferson is 62 years old, his sentence could be a life sentence, since there is no parole in the federal prison system, although he could get 15 per cent of his sentence off for good behavior.

Jefferson was convicted after a six-week trial in Alexandria, Virginia. He was found guilty of 11 of 16 counts after he was indicted in June, 2007.  But his indictment followed highly publicized activity in the case.  Jefferson was videotaped by the FBI in July, 2005, receiving $100,000 of $100 bills in a briefcase in Arlington, Virginia.  Captured by a wire on one of the participants, Jefferson allegedly advised an informant to give Nigerian Vice President Atiku Abubakar $500,000 to make sure their business interests obtained contracts for their companies in Nigeria.

A few days later the FBI raided Jefferson’s home in Washington, D.C. and claimed to have found $90,000 of the cash in the freezer in $10,000 increments, wrapped in aluminum foil and stuffed inside frozen-food containers.”  The FBI claimed the serial numbers found on the bills in Jefferson’s home matched serial numbers of the money the FBI had given to their informant.

It was nine months later that the really big raid took place.  FBI agents executed a search warrant on Jefferson’s office in the House of Representatives, the Rayburn House Office Building.  Jefferson was a sitting Congressman at the time, and the FBI raid is believed to be the first time a raid was ever conducted on the office of member of Congress.

The separation of powers implications raised great concerns.  Members of Congress feared the precedent of law enforcement officers raiding legislators’ offices.   If legislators’ offices could be raided whenever agents of the executive branch claimed they were on the trail of criminal evidence, the legislative branch of government could be at the mercy of the executive branch.  These are the kinds of raids Russia’s Premier Putin has conducted to crush the formerly free press and private businessmen who challenged Putin.  These are the kinds of raids governments around the world have used as a pretext to force legislators to follow the command of the executive.

Congressional leaders immediately demanded the FBI return documents seized from the raid of Congressman Jefferson’s House office.  House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi spoke out together.  Reportedly Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and FBI Director Robert Mueller threatened to quit if the Justice Department had to return the documents.  Meanwhile, the House of Representatives was threatening to axe the Justice Department’s budget.  President Bush ultimately directed the Justice Department to seal all seized evidence for 45 days.

At the time, an ABC News poll in June, 2006 found 86% in the United States supported the FBI’s right to search congressional offices when they obtain a warrant.  This should be no surprise. The public’s support of law enforcement always outweighs support of Constitutional restraints.  At least the poll dealt with a search warrant.

As any criminal defense lawyer will tell you, members of the general public for the most part always will see the justification of unconstitutional actions in the results.  If the police acted without probable cause or a trumped up justification, the public does not often question the action.  There are significant exceptions, but for the most part, the safeguards of the Constitution are not appreciated by the general public when weighed against the value of “getting bad guys.”.

The public wants crimes solved, and the restraints on government placed by the Constitution are seen as speed bumps to be ignored only “a case at a time.”  The “case at a time,” of course, becomes the rule rather than the exception because in every case there is a “good reason” to go ahead with ignoring the restraints, to go ahead and get this guy because “this guy really needs getting” or “this crime really needs solving.”  The Constitution remains on the sidelines from little use until that member of the public or this person has an experience when they are surprised at how easy the rules have made it to convict someone innocent of a crime.

William Jefferson challenged the raid on his office to the District Court of the District of Columbia.  The Court held that the broad protections of the Speech or Debate Clause, which give absolute immunity from prosecution for legislative acts does not shield members of Congress from the execution of valid search warrants.  For those who fear executive overreach, it is noteworthy that search warrants would necessarily require approval from the judicial branch of government.  Oddly, Chief Hogan, who made this finding was the one who had approved the original search.

The decision of the District Court was appealed to a three-judge panel held that Department of Justice could not review Jefferson’s filed until Jefferson had seen what files had been taken from his office and which pertained to his legislative duties.

Thereafter the House of Representatives stripped Jefferson of his committee assignment in the House.  Jefferson was reelected in 2006, but after being indicted in 2007, he lost election in 2008, upset by a Republican in an overwhelmingly Democratic district.  Jefferson went to trial as an ex-Congressman.