Rubashkin Federal Sentencing Delayed

Sentencing delayed due to state child labor trial.

Rubashkin federal sentencing delayed due to Waterloo trial

JEFF REINITZ • Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier

CEDAR RAPIDS --- Federal sentencing for former Agriprocessors executive Sholom Rubashkin has been delayed.

Rubashkin, who had worked at the meatpacking plant in Postville when it was raided in May 2008, is currently on trial in Waterloo for misdemeanor state child labor violations.

That trial is slated to last the rest of this week and overlaps with sentencing Rubashkin's federal fraud conviction, which had been scheduled for Thursday.

Today (Monday) U.S. District Court Judge Linda Reade entered an order delaying the federal sentencing until June 22. The sentencing will be at 3:30 p.m. at the courthouse in Cedar Rapids.

Rubashkin has been convicted for fraud in connection with loans the company received, and a sentencing hearing had started April 28. Judge Reade didn't announce the punishment, saying she needed more time to consider the matter. She initailly said Thursday was the date the sentence would be completed.

Meanwhile trial for the state child labor charges started May 11.

Comments

[shmaryahu is like paroh [loves to bathe in jewish blood]

shmaryahu,you dirty rat, you piece of human garbage, what do you want from this family? didn't you drink enough of their blood?
i have no doubt at all,have you lived 65 yrs ago in Europe,you would have been the head KAPO in Auschwitz,and with a smile on your ugly face you would have dragged your own brothers and sisters into the gas chamber

[harold]

Wow is justice slow! So much for quick and speedy trial crock! If the judge came up with a number spit it out! Why all this high drama. Maybe she wants maximum publicity for her decision.

[steve]

More time to collect piyon $hvuyim dollars and for Matzav/Al Jazeera to spin its tales.

[A E ANDERSON]

Does this mean,"let's wait and see which way the winds blow?" Or is there finally some recognition on the federal jurist's part that something less than a full and fair airing of the facts was achieved in that federal courtroom in Sioux Falls months ago?

It may well be a recognition of yet something else: how the flawed federal sentencing guidelines are reliant on externalities not reviewed at the trial or sentencing levels. If so, a substantial win on Rubashkin's part would also serve to cast doubt on many of the allegations being used to aggravate Rubashkin's sentence.

If the same cast of government witnesses are found to lack credibility at the state trial, that cannot help (at the very least) but to colour how their federal testimony and the federal testimony of their colleagues is viewed with respect to sentencing. That could well eliminate quite a few counts, and leave sentencing to be largely confined to the technical "fraud" and stockyard payers counts.

Either way, the end result will be a trial record rife with grounds for appeal.

What seems fascinating at this stage is how the effect of prosecutorial melodrama is fading. While at its peak after the raid, and still potent up through the federal trial, the hysteria could no longer be maintained at full volume as some sense of balance and reason (fair or not) came to be restored. It's as if the prosecutors suffered from premature climax.... all doesn't seem as pretty and nobody as naughty now as it did on the heated ride up.

As much as each witness seemed initially a poster child for textbook labour abuse, testimony in each instance revealed a rather more sordid picture: each "child labourer" had gone to extraordinarily deceitful lengths to conceal their true ages and thereby gain and maintain employment, and most were now substantially benefitting from special federal U visas given to them to testify against Rubashkin. There was much mention of "coyotes," or illegal Mexican-border people smugglers, who reportedly maintain to this day a financial stranglehold on the immigrants' families' foreign homesteads until their smuggling "fees" are paid. If so, why is this a trial of Mr Rubashkin and not the true villains, the coyotes?

In what forum is our protagonist, Mr Rubashkin, recalled to life? Not in the vaunted federal courts, with their storied record of blind justice, and institutionalised overprotection of the highly formalised system of civil rights (Title this, Title that). But in a state misdemeanor court, once thought to be the very locus of fast local justice meted out quickly, successor to the law and order police courts of a previous generation.

Here, we have a local judiciary willing publicly to question the credibility of witnesses, who is not catatonically overawed by opaque jury instructions that he actually allows a defence to.... defend itself!

Still, this is less an ode to a local court in Iowa, and more a condemnation of what the federal system (not unlike other areas of federal endeavour) has come to represent. The message we hear, resoundingly, is that the federal trial at the evidentiary level is less about establishing truth or falsity, and more about regulating what can and cannot be presented to a jury. In other words, information management.

[The Real Joe]

Any one have a clue if bail is a bigger reality at this point with this continues pushing back of the sentencing

[Bill]

“Does this mean, "let's wait and see which way the winds blow?" - Anderson

That’s precisely what this means. If you don’t like it, then you have to treat the Court and prosecution differently. This is the real world. Not a yeshiva.

As I said two weeks ago:

“The most powerful player in all of this right now is the district court judge. This was by design (1. district court delayed sentencing 2. state prosecution dropped and plea bargained so as to shorten the state trial).

She is holding all the cards.

Cert. on the bail issue was denied by the Supreme Court. She will wait for the verdict and possibly sentencing in the state trial before deciding what the federal sentence will be.

She will decide whether the punishment will fit the crime (5-15 years) or the criminal (15-25 years).

She may also be in a position to decide whether the federal and state sentences will run concurrently or not.
SMR has a lot to fear…..”

“…. at minimum, it appears that she will be in a position to sentence SMR post state verdict. At maximum, she might be in a position to decide whether the sentences will run concurrently or not. The net effect is that the "spread" of time SMR might actually spend in prison as a consequence of Reade's sentence is potentially getting much wider as a result of this delay.”

[Bill]

For all you haredim out there.

These is a perfect example of how this great "malchut shell chessed" ("Kindom of Kindness") of ours will stick it to you big time if you act disrespectful, shifty, and underhanded.

[Shmarya]

Wow is justice slow! So much for quick and speedy trial crock! If the judge came up with a number spit it out! Why all this high drama. Maybe she wants maximum publicity for her decision.

You are a complete idiot, 'harold'.

Rubashkin had a speedy trial – one that was delayed several times at HIS request.

Past that obvious point, what the judge has done is decide to issue the sentence in court at a hearing, rather than simply issue it in writing, which was, it seems, her original plan. She's giving Rubashkin the opportunity to hear the sentence in open court.

She can't easily do this while the state trial is running, hence the delay.

[Bill]

"wow is justice slow" - Harold

I agree with Harold on this point.

justice can be excruciatingly and painfully slow, especially for a jackass siting in county jail and trying to game the federal judicial system.

[Office of the Chief Rabbi]

Sentencing on June 22? John Dillinger's birthday!

[harold]

Rubashkin had a speedy trial

The trial is not over until sentence is announced.

You are a complete idiot, 'harold'.

[Shmarya]

The trial is not over until sentence is announced.

Idiot.

The trial is over when the VERDICT is announced.

Sentencing can be immediate or can take place weeks or even several months later. All of this is constitutional.

Also, the delay is in Rubashkin's favor, not in his detriment.

But why let fact get in the way of a delusional troll's blabberings.

[Cheskel]

My two senses:
The Judge is awaiting outcome of the case.
The way the trial is going, IF common sense prevails it will be a not guilty.
With all the heat the judge is getting from top legal experts,she will take in account if found not guilty and accordingly her sentence will be.

All Rubashkin haters and self hating jews don't shake yet in your boots there is still hope for you that he will be found guilty.

[harold]

The trial is over when the VERDICT is announced

Technically, but not practically.

If someone is waiting for a decision between time served to life imprisonment I am sure that in his eyes the “trial” is not over until he knows what his punishment is.

[Shmarya]

What he's waiting for is somewhere between 15 and 25 years, and time served counts off that.

So he's really not waiting for much.

[Bill]

"Anyone have a clue if bail is a bigger reality now...?" - Real Joe

Joe,

There will be no bail. Judge Reade has a big, fat, juicy and slippery fish in her net right now, and she's not gonna let it swim away.

If the defense attorney wants to look tough and work more billable hours then they can request a Writ of Mandamus from the Appellate Court directing the District Court to sentence SMR as originally scheduled.

That would backfire very horribly against Mr. Rubashkin, though, so the short and long answer is no - no bail.

[effie]

Interrupting the jury trial so the defendant can be sentenced in another court in order to please harold is ridiculous.

And it's not like Rubashkin is going to be released after sentencing. Plus, he's being held in custody on two separate cases.

[effie]

There is absolutely no reason to delay a jury trial in another court for this sentencing. That is why Reade kicked it over.

[harold]

Interrupting the jury trial so the defendant can be sentenced in another court in order to please harold is ridiculous

Since all that has to be done is announce the length of the sentence I assumed it wouldn't take more than an hour at most.

I assumed all that would happen is that Rubashkin would be told to rise and the judge would state that after considering all the arguments and evidence that she heard she herby sentences Rubashkin to “X” years in jail. I guess I watch too much TV.

[effie]

No, harold, it would not only take an hour. They have to transport him from Linn Co. jail to the US Courthouse and from there to the trial court in Waterloo. Rubashkin has the right to address the court before sentencing is imposed. The judge will probably also have a lot to say.

If the court prepared a written memorandum, I can't imagine both sides not getting a copy in advance. They can't spring a 30 page memo on them with out giving them time to read it and for them to go over it with Rubashkin. But, I don't know this for sure.

[effie]

Plus, what do you think his emotional state will be after sentencing? It wouldn't be fair to immediately send him to Waterloo to resume the trial.

[Bill]

Perhaps Rubashkin will spend even more time lecturing the district court judge about "the Unity of God," as he did during the previous hearing.

[Abracadabra]

Bill, you're right on the money.

Meanwhile, Judge Reade will have the last word, even IF Rubashkin wants to laiyn the whole Torah in Hebrew and English for the court.

Harold, Rubashkin's own attorneys asked for 6 years! WHY is anyone talking about a sentence of "time served"??!! The fact that his wife says that in speeches is understandable, as she is probably in denial and that is the only way she can cope. But if his attorneys asked for 6 years, why would anyone other than his wife dream of anything less than what his very own attorneys asked for?!

Judge Reade wants to hold all the cards, as the senior judge in the 2 current cases, it's her right. Besides, if Rubashkin is found guilty in the state trial, the judge would probably NOT rule that he should serve concurrently. So, he is lucky that Judge Reade gets the last word.

It's probably all that Tehillim that everyone is saying for him... And in the zechus of all the tzedaka they are giving to his lawyers, I mean to his pidyon shevuyim fund. Boruch Hashem!

[Bill]

"Judge Reade will have the last word, even if Rubashkin wants to layn the whole Torah in Hebrew and English." - Abra

Abra,

There is this hilarious scene in the Supranos - you can google it - where Tony and his men are shaking down a crooked haredi.

The haredi, out of nowhere belts out with a, "As the Talmud says ...." to which Tony interrupts with, "I don't give a shit what HE says, okay?"

I'm not sure why but it cracks me up every time.

[Abracadabra]

Hey Bill - I did a search but couldn't find it. But it sounds like a good laugh!

Well, they organized a kinos for SMR for this week. Too bad the Federal sentencing was pushed off. Do you think their tefilos can be applied to the state trial, even though they originally organized the kinos for the sentencing for the Federal trial? I'm not sure if shomayim can arrange that kind of an amendment on such a last-minute notice, especially since the kavanos were setup for Federal sentencing. The other option is to ask that the tefilos be put in a treasure chest on hold until June 22nd. But their effect might have worn off somewhat by then, having sat idle for a month. Also, the tefillos likely wont be as desperate, and therefore possibly not as powerful as an 11th-hour cry to storm the gates.

These are all issues I guess they will have to figure out. I'm so glad I'm not on the organization committee.

;)

[Bill]

Abra,

These are very profound "shylehs."