Rubashkin Attorneys Ask Judge To Dismiss 91 Fraud Charges

“Simply put, the government has overreached. There is an insufficient linkage for a criminal conviction…Breach of contract does not equal a crime.”

Attorneys in Agriprocessors case ask judge to dismiss 91 fraud charges
BY GRANT SCHULTE • Des Moines Register

Sioux Falls, S.D. — Attorneys for an embattled northeast Iowa meat plant manager have asked a judge to dismiss all of his 91 financial fraud charges.

Lawyers for Sholom Rubashkin filed a motion on Monday asking a judge to acquit their client. The former vice president at Agriprocessors Inc. faces a bevy of charges including bank, mail and wire fraud, money laundering and ignoring an order to pay cattle providers in the 24-hour window required by law.

The request, filed in court papers, is routine. Defense lawyers moved to have the charges dismissed for what they say is a failure to prove Rubashkin’s guilt.

“The government’s case has been oversold,” attorneys wrote in the motion, prepared by lawyer Adam D. Zenor. “Simply put, the government has overreached. There is an insufficient linkage for a criminal conviction between Agriprocessors’ ultimate failure to make payments under a loan agreement and Agriprocessors’ business practices. Breach of contract does not equal a crime.”

Defense testimony resumes this morning during week four of Rubashkin’s trial in Sioux Falls, S.D.

Agriprocessors Inc. was the site of a May 2008 immigration raid that caught 389 illegal workers. The plant has since filed for bankruptcy, changed ownership, and changed its name to Agri Star.

Rubashkin will likely testify on Thursday, defense lawyer Guy Cook said in court.

U.S. District Judge Linda Reade has not yet ruled on the motion.

Comments

[AGRI-vated Angel]

SMR is the one who overreached each time he tried to cover his 'tracks' with a new crime. Lies tend to grow & grow until they burst and send one's life into a frenzy.

[The sane one]

DENIED!!!

[state of disgust]

I have been trying to figure out why the prosecutors would not have mentioned that Chaim Abrahams is related to SMR which would have destroyed Chaim's testimony. The only reason I can come up with is there may be additional charges being brought which would implicate Abrahams, and the prosecution does not want to blow the case by introducing incriminating evidence at this time. I would like to hear what attorney's have to say.

[yael]

They are not related at all. Abrahms is married to Rapoport from WI. Although he was always a loyal servent to SMR and worked his way up the ranks there is no crime in that. He is not the sharpest tool in the shed and definitly and alchoholic but again no crime there either.

[Shmarya]

Rubashkin's own court documents submitted the week before the trial lists Abrahams as his brother-in-law.