What Does Rubashkin's Not Guilty Verdict Mean?

This is no time for Chabad and haredim to be rejoicing.

Here's why you shouldn't rejoice:

1. Both the defense and the prosecution agree there were minors working in the plant.

2. Rubashkin's defense was primarily that other Agriprocessors employees were responsible for the crimes. First among those employees is Sholom Rubashkin's brother Heshy, mentioned many times during the trial.

3. In other words, the person ultimately responsible for those minors working in Agriprocessors according to Sholom Rubashkin is Heshy Rubashkin.

4. The prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Sholom Rubashkin knew minors worked in the plant. This failure of proof is due in large part to incompetence by Iowa's Attorney General and his staff. It would be hard to put on a weaker prosecution than Iowa did.

5. There are several very credible witnesses who told Sholom Rubashkin that minors were working in Agriprocessors. Those witnesses were not interviewed by the Attorney General's office and they were not asked to testify. Why?

6. Primarily because each witness would have required transportation and lodging, and that would have cost the state several thousand dollars, and the state, I've been led to believe, did not want to spend the money. One witness even called the AG's office and asked if they wanted him to testify. We'll get back to you if we need you, was the response. But Iowa did not get back to the witness, and they did not contact the other witnesses I mentioned. That meant jurors had to judge Rubashkin based on the testimony of Matthew Derrik, a man whose credibility was questionable in the eyes of many.

7. At any rate Rubashkin's defense team pointed their collective finger at Heshy Rubashkin, who like his brother Sholom was an Agriprocessors VP.

8. Does it make you feel any better about Agriprocessors labor practices if the documented abuses are Heshy's fault rather than Sholom's?

9. If it does make you feel better, I posit there is something drastically wrong with your moral compass.

Now a bit of housekeeping.

I'm sorry I was late posting the verdict. I had an appointment with a doctor that I could not cancel, and then a nursing home visit I needed to make.

I checked in between the doctor and the nursing home but no verdict had been reached. Ten minutes later that changed, but I didn't see that until I got back home just before 3:00 pm.

I'm sorry I let you all down on this.

Comments

[Bill]

The above is a prime example of rearranging the chairs on the Titanic.

Rejoice, ye Haredim, rejoice!

[injustice and state of iowa aginst jews]

You are an anti semite. Just like in Germany. The jews always at fault. Never be found innocent.

[Shmarya]

You are an anti semite. Just like in Germany. The jews always at fault. Never be found innocent.

Rubashkin's defense team said Heshy was responsible.

How can you live with that?

[Dr Moe]

Shmaray,

Now everyone knows your a KNOWN LOSER :)
N O T G U I L T Y

The Jury of his peers (whos tax dollars were used) spoke out and said the DA were LIARS :)

[Shmarya]

Now everyone knows your a KNOWN LOSER :)
N O T G U I L T Y

The Jury of his peers (whos tax dollars were used) spoke out and said the DA were LIARS :)

No.

What the jury found was that Rubashkin's guilt could not be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

What was that doubt?

Heshy might have done it.

And that should make you sad rather than happy.

[Ben Yomo]

I don't disagree with you. But let me ask you one question -- if SMR was convicted, would you really have issued such a similar plea for restraint to your dancing cohorts such as Sage, etc.?

I didn't think so

[harold]

All that I know is that a not guilty verdict is better than a guilty verdict no matter how you spin it. Nuf said!

[Cheskel]

There is light in the tunnel.
Even though a frum Jew hardly has a chance at a trial but when its against all common sense,Justice prevails.
As i said before,the judge in the federal trial delayed sentencing i think because she wanted to see the outcome in the labor trial and according to the outcome the sentencing will be.
All you self hating secular so called Jews are shaking in your boots that perhaps Rubashkin will get a light sentence. Non of you are worried about workers conditions,minors or illegals. All you care about that schcita shouldn't excised and if a frum Jew gets caught with a minor crime you should be able to make it as Madoff scheme.

[Shmarya]

I don't disagree with you. But let me ask you one question -- if SMR was convicted, would you really have issued such a similar plea for restraint to your dancing cohorts such as Sage, etc.?

I didn't think so

I've done that many times over the past 2 years.

[Dr Moe]

Shmarya,

Only your little gang on Liars will agree with you not the good people of Iowa who's tax dollars were STOLEN by the DA.

[Ma Rabbi]

If you think that Iowa will now charge Heshy, then you are drinking Kool-Aid. Not just Chabad, but all religious Jews are rejoicing over this verdict. Check out VIN.

[Shmarya]

Only your little gang on Liars will agree with you not the good people of Iowa who's tax dollars were STOLEN by the DA.

Please.

The state doesn't win every prosecution, and not all defendants found not guilty are innocent.

If you knew something, anything, about civics you'd know that. But you don't, because Ohelei Torah doesn't teach secular studies.

[Shmarya]

If you think that Iowa will now charge Heshy, then you are drinking Kool-Aid.

I never wrote that the state would charge Heshy.

All I did was point out that Sholom's defense was largely predicated on Heshy being guilty.

[Bill]

"What does Rubashkin's not guilty verdict mean?" - Shmarya

It means not guilty, not more nor less, but precisely.

[reality]

What credible witnesses. There wasn't a one. Alcoholic, Child molestor, runner from the law, etc. etc.
NOT GUILTY !!

[p]

Shmarya,

If you are t-r-u-l-y concerned that justice be done in this case against SMR, you should be ecstatic with this verdict. The case against him was not proven. The most that there is, is circumstancial evidence that Heshy knew something. Why should SMR be the fall guy for Heshy's wrongdoing??

This is a great day for American justice. A person in America is not convicted for the actions of his brother. This is nothing for the Rubashkin family as a whole to be proud of, but to convict someone based on guilt by association is flat out wrong.

[Ber]

shmarya,

you're an idiot.

if the state thought they had a case, they would have spent limitless amounts of money. they spent $35,000.00 on the minors alone!!!!

[WoolSilkCotton]

Holy ravioli, Batman!

Now there's that bit of unpleasantness coming on June 22...

[Shmarya]

If you are t-r-u-l-y concerned that justice be done in this case against SMR, you should be ecstatic with this verdict. The case against him was not proven. The most that there is, is circumstancial evidence that Heshy knew something. Why should SMR be the fall guy for Heshy's wrongdoing??

Reread what I wrote.

There are witnesses who told Sholom Rubashkin about the minors. Those witnesses are credible, but the state did not call them.

[Agri-vated Angel]

Win,

. . . or did he?

Sholom may be setting himself up for eternal damnation, after bathing in a pool of deception and self-gratification.

Fear not, he will not be alone; he will be in the steadfast company of the serpent of Hell and all his followers.

[Dr Moe]

The state doesn't win every prosecution, and not all defendants found not guilty are innocent.

If you knew something, anything, about civics you'd know that. But you don't, because Ohelei Torah doesn't teach secular studies.

This defendant was found to be INNOCENT now blame it on Ohlie Toah the Lubavicther Rebbe and Ohel LOL :)

[Shmarya]

you're an idiot.

if the state thought they had a case, they would have spent limitless amounts of money. they spent $35,000.00 on the minors alone!!!!

The AG's office had to get special permission from the governor to spend the money to bring in the witnesses from Guatemala and Mexico.

I've been led to believe the State of Iowa wasn't willing to spend money to bring in other witnesses (like the ones I mentioned above) or expertprosecutorials needed to bolster parts of its case.

This was prosecutorial incompetence, plain and simple.

[chunky]

@ shmarya,

If you were the prosecuter rubashkin probably would have gotten life. did you ever do anything illegal? Out of thousands of workers that were hired they found 26 that were underage as in 16, 17 years old is that a case that deserves headline news or maybe a fine?

[Shmarya]

This defendant was found to be INNOCENT now blame it on Ohlie Toah the Lubavicther Rebbe and Ohel LOL :)

No.

The defendant was found to be "not guilty."

That means the prosecution was not able to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt; it does not mean that Sholom Rubashkin is innocent.

If you'd had civics classes in Ohelei Torah, you'd know that.

But as I noted above, you did not.

[injustice and state of iowa aginst jews]

All I did was point out that Sholom's defense was largely predicated on Heshy being guilty.

This is also not true. The defense was proving that these minors might have never seen sholom only heshy. Also that it might be sholom was not incharge of HR heshy was incharge so why making a case aginst sholom. Mind you the jury found him not guilty because these minors where just straight out lying and they where convinced that the state was trying to make a case of somthing that didnt exist.

[Shmarya]

If you were the prosecuter rubashkin probably would have gotten life. did you ever do anything illegal? Out of thousands of workers that were hired they found 26 that were underage as in 16, 17 years old is that a case that deserves headline news or maybe a fine?

First of all, there were more than 26 underage workers.

Secondly, lots of meat plants have been raided in the last five years. None of them had anything like that number of underage workers.

[Shmarya]

The defense was proving that these minors might have never seen sholom only heshy. Also that it might be sholom was not incharge of HR heshy was incharge so why making a case aginst sholom. Mind you the jury found him not guilty because these minors where just straight out lying and they where convinced that the state was trying to make a case of somthing that didnt exist.

The defense created reasonable doubt by in effect making Heshy guilty.

[Fraud alert]

Let all the Chasids rejoice as fools. It's like celebrating when the doctor says a patient is "cancer free" after treatment. Invariably, in many cases, the cancer returns. The cancer in this case will be jail and no chemo will help.

[injustice and state of iowa aginst jews]

Shmarya, you hate rubashkin and you would love to see him in jail for life. Right?

Dont you think that the Jury had more reasons to believe he is not guilty besides of deciding that heshy is the guilt?

[grn]

oh how nice, all along you were talking about moral compass & legality of what he was accused of during the trial, it is sad you cannot accept the verdict & you continue to justify as oppose to adjust your feeling to the verdict, in fact your feelings have no legal standing, and yes if the prosecution cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that equates to being legally innocent, any information that came out in the trial means absolutely nothing legally.. regarding the term you use moral compass who are you to calibrate the moral compass of society…..

[OMG]

I is ok to celebrate a finding by the jury of not guilty, as a matter of fact this not guilty verdict, should actually open the eyes of the majority on this site, nothing better than saying, I feel good for SMR, but for VIN to write an editorial by a Rabbi and call for apologies, for what for abusing minors in illegal jobs? How would you feel if, Al Sharpton and company after the Lemrick Nelson first State trial, demanding apologies, the same should be said in this case, the fact children were employed by Agri with or without the direct knowledge of SMR and his family. It is time for Management of Agri to apologize to the people who were directly affected.
Finally I challenge everyone who is celebrating this jury outcome they should evaluate their views about the outcome in the federal case. If you celebrate one you must except the other one.

[chabadnik attorney]

Shmarya, 1. I agree with your general assessment. 2. I only have one problem. When the State or Govt delivers an outcome that agrees with your view then they your full faith and backing. This is an ongoing theme of yours. In some of my earlier posts I would argue about incompetence of and distrust in the govt. its motives etc. Here, if Rubashkin were f]guilty you would say justice was served. Since he wasn't your a alleging all kind of Govt. screw up.

I know you will differentiate and say your opinion is based on investigation and facts etc. Bottom line is to me its no different, at times, than the meshichist who starts at a conclusion or with an agenda and works backwards to prove it. At times.

My main point from day one is don't put your faith in bankrupt belief.

As far as innocent or not guilty goes. People here always argue that "innocent until proven guilty" is only in a court of law. They have the right to consider him guilty anyway. Right now as it stands SMR is "innocent" by a legal standard "in a court of law". Was he found "innocent" by the court, no. But, from the court's perspective he didn't have to be found "innocent" because he is "presumed innocent until found guilty by a jury of his peers". Is he guilty in the court of public opinion that is your battle to wage, I guess. From a criminal legal point of view he is presumed innocent.

[Shmarya]

Shmarya, you hate rubashkin and you would love to see him in jail for life. Right?

Dont you think that the Jury had more reasons to believe he is not guilty besides of deciding that heshy is the guilt?

Sure there were other reasons. But those reasons alone wouldn't have saved Rubashkin.

[Shmarya]

And, again, Rubashkin's defense team essentially blamed it on Heshy.

[injustice and state of iowa aginst jews]

Fraud alert, we chasids have it right why do you think rubashkin won becuase we CHASIDS got together to see how our self hating jews are treating one of ourselves. If we would get together before the federal case it would look differently. Look this judge pushed off sentencing twice all because of the CHASIDS starting to get together and putting bunch of pressure. Now, we see that there is some kind of war agianst all of us we will show you who we are and what we can do together. YOU WOKE UP THE BEAR. We will bring down PITA and these conservative movments. Rubashkins case will be reapealed and proven being full of unjustice and aginst a jew persanlly and agaist all of us.

[Shmarya]

I know you will differentiate and say your opinion is based on investigation and facts etc. Bottom line is to me its no different, at times, than the meshichist who starts at a conclusion or with an agenda and works backwards to prove it. At times.

As I wrote above, I know of witnesses who told Rubashkin about the kids working in the plant. Those witnesses were not interviewed by the state and they were not called to testify.

For months, I've been telling people who have asked me that I did not think the state had the talent to convict Rubashkin or to conduct a massive case against him, his father and his brother and the HR workers and supervisors.

The state put on a terrible case. It was incompetent to the extreme.

And I wasn't at all surprised by that.

[Vindicated]

PULLLLEEEEZE!! I understand being disappointed Shmarya, but your comment about the "defense created reasonable doubt by in effect making Heshy guilty" belongs in the category entitled DELUSIONAL!

[sandra]

EXPERIENCED , HIGH POWERED , criminal defense lawyers that r paid millions know many ways to get their client free . EVEN WITH EVIDENCE and WITNESSES .

they know how to present a case to a jury . and most of the time, they win .
not difficult AS LONG AS U PAY THE BILL.

.......MILLIONS , down !

rubashkin is lucky to have big bucks .

in any situation , ur money will get u to b free .

[Shmarya]

PULLLLEEEEZE!! I understand being disappointed Shmarya, but your comment about the "defense created reasonable doubt by in effect making Heshy guilty" belongs in the category entitled DELUSIONAL!

Not at all.

Go back and read the trial live blogs and see what the defense did.

[sandra]

whyat about the bank fraud ?

will there b a separate trial ?

they have everything on the paper , black on white .

will rubashkin gets jail for that ?

or they just gonna let it go ?

shame for our judicial system

[nachos]

chabadnik attorney:

That situation I emailed you about months ago was taken care of. Thanks for your help.

[Vindicated]

Shmarya, who are these other witnesses whom the government should have called? Can you elaborate on them specifically? You said the government didn't want to spend alot of money to bring them here? Are you referring to yourself as being one of them?

[Shmarya]

Shmarya, who are these other witnesses whom the government should have called? Can you elaborate on them specifically? You said the government didn't want to spend alot of money to bring them here? Are you referring to yourself as being one of them?

All I can tell you now is that I'm not one of them.

[nachos]

This whole victory is no cause for celebration. Maybe Shalom has finally begun to repent and G-d is in the process of restoring him.

In any event, the fact the prosecution had enough to bring this case but not enough for a conviction is nothing to be proud of. We all need to pray that this is the begining of Hashem hearing and responding to the pleas of Shalom's heart.

[Vindicated]

I followed the live blog of the trial from day 1 up until today's verdict because I wanted to hear all the evidence. In my opinion, the defense' case trumped the state's case, hands down! The witnesses stated again and again, that they lied to secure employment at Agri, they lied to ICE and they lied to investigators while in custody. A pattern of deceptive actions by ALL of the witnesses was observed by the jury. The jury foreman stated to the Des Moines Register reporter that the state didn't present evidence that showed a clear line between Rubashkin and the 26 children named in the complaint.

[sandra]

'vindicated',

u r an idiot .
they were 5 witnesses that were supposed to come to testify , but end uo not coming . that was not good for the case .

shmarya is not a witness . idiot !~

[Vindicated]

Since the trial is now over, why not name or provide some details of whom these other possible witnesses are? The state is not going to pursue this again, so there's no harm in giving us some details.

[Shmarya]

Since the trial is now over, why not name or provide some details of whom these other possible witnesses are? The state is not going to pursue this again, so there's no harm in giving us some details.

I have to get permission from them first.

[Vindicated]

sandra, do I detect a certain amount of animosity towards my comment? Why the name-calling? I haven't done that. Can you not accept that Rubashkin was acquitted today? Accept it and move on.

[chabadnik attorney]

Posted by: nachos | June 07, 2010 at 05:11 PM

I remember discussing something with you on the blog but I don't remember getting an email. My mind is somewhat frayed lately dealing with stress created by the backward way of thinking sadly sometimes and too often taught in our frum communities. If you had a loss, I am very sorry to hear and I am glad matters worked out under the circumstances. If I am misunderstanding or not remembering correctly then I apologize. Either way I wish you well.

[nachos]

Chabadnik attorney:

You are correct. Things went very smoothly for the arrangements and it was a peaceful end. Thanks for your help.

Now I can fade off into the background. :)

[sandra]

witnesses ' names r not released .

u shud kno that , idiot !

which world do u live in ?

the chabad chACIDIC world .

a marginal who live at the edge of society ?

or a blood sucker , a parasite who live at the expense of the tax payers ?

go to 770 and stick up the place more than it is already .

and try to plot something to suck the tax payers thru ur community council .

the community council will give u a form to fill to get a few hundred $ , to keep u going for a while . until u come back to fill another form .

what else do u do of ur time, anyway .

u do not work . u collect .

everything has been set up by the KING mobster ,the business man, with a brainy brain .

u know who am i referring to .

............ur rebbe .

[WoolSilkCotton]

Chabadnik Attorney, I agree with everything you've been saying today.
SMR was found not guilty, and I concur with what the jury foreman said when interviewed afterward.

There is the matter coming up June 22. It is still not too late to put together a package deal to keep his prison time to a (relative) minimum. I hope SMR has the good sense to be agreeable to this- say what needs to be said in front of the judge, agree to financial restitutions, donations, whatever it takes to keep the sentence to under a decade.
His attorneys could package it so as to help him save face and yet still say what he needs to say in front of the judge.

As you know, a lot of sentences get whittled down after sentencing, and that can be worked on behind the scenes once the noise dies down.

He cannot undo the guilty verdict; now he has to do what he has to do to keep the sentence as short as possible.

[ha ha ha]

your a sore loser!
your team lost, and now your giving excuses! bla bla bla
you sided with the anti-semites, you backed those who seek the destroction of Shchita and Kosher laws in america.
thank g-d that you horse lost

[nachos]

ha ha ha:

There is no team!!!

[Shmarya]

your a sore loser!
your team lost, and now your giving excuses! bla bla bla
you sided with the anti-semites, you backed those who seek the destroction of Shchita and Kosher laws in america.
thank g-d that you horse lost

The defense admitted that Agriprocessors had an incompetent business structure and that it did not handle employment issues correctly.

It also admitted minors worked in the plant, but it blamed HR and Heshy for that.

Again, I don't understand why you think a screwed up business that had Heshy and not Sholom committing these crimes is anything to celebrate.

[nachos]

destroction of Shchita and Kosher laws in america
Posted by: ha ha ha | June 07, 2010 at 05:47 PM

Do you really think ripping the throat out of a live animal is Shechita and kosher?

[chabadnik attorney]

Hi WSC, you of course are 100% correct. Though, I am not familiar with the federal system, so i don't know what ways, if any, are available to get a sentence reduced at a later date. I will take your word on that.

I have zero confidence that SMR will say what he needs to at sentencing. I feel very bad for him, his family and for the system that has failed many of us. I believe that as much as he is culpable for his actions that an equal amount of culpability is on his community for making him into a martyr and now placing him in a position where he probably believes that he is one or that to let down that persona will somehow be an injustice to his supporters and Yidden at large.

The suffering caused by Yidden ignoring the law has hurt and continues to hurt many people. And like many say here, if you actually believe that all the gentiles hate us and that a Jew can't get a fair trial then why would you give them an excuse to pursue you.

BTW, you seem to be have been in a worse mood against Rubashkin etc since your visit to Crown Heights (I think on Purim) Remember, I told you not to go because it would just upset you. Was I right or am I totally off base?

[Vindicated]

sandra, you're so upset by the verdict that you can't write coherently. Truth be told, I'm a life-long Catholic grandmother from the midwest. I am retired, so you're correct in that I am no longer working. I have few questions for you. What do the following words you wrote mean?

"shuld?" "ur?" "u?" "770?" Please explain them to this fun-loving midwestern grandmother okay? Try not to be so bitter!

[sandra]

everyone knows what 770 means . i'm not explaining .

shud, ur ( for your ) u ( for you )

it's quick writing language on the net .
it will avoid you to write the whole word .

[nachos]

Vindicated:

ur=your
u= you

770= the address in Brooklyn of the late Menacham Shneerson who many lubavitchers mistakenly beleive is the messiah.
770 Iowa Street= The address of the jail in Dubuque where Shalom was held for quite some time.

[chabadnik attorney]

Vindicated, ROTFLOL

[chabadnik attorney]

Nachos, I am sorry that I am cracking up over here but Vindicated's comment was humor.

[mordecai]

Whether Rubashkin was convicted personally of these misdemeanors is really not the important issue. The following should be noted:

(1) He had to spend large sums of money on his defense

(2) He had to suffer the significant anxiety of being a defendant and made to answer for the alleged crimes

(3) The State made it abundantly clear to every other employer in the State that it won't tolerate child labor

(4) It was made clear that somebody (his brother) knowingly hired child labor thereby

[nachos]

I am aware of that

[chabadnik attorney]

Have a good night. Only a sick twisted person like myself could find the humor in this terrible sad saga. Its either laugh or cry.

Sandra, in all sincerity, if you are a real person, I hope you are seeking professional help. I am scheduling an appt for myself as well so don't be insulted.

[nachos]

Just trying to put my dig into the 770 crowd

[yidandahalf]

vindicated is a fucking Rubash-in spy sent by Heshey or his toadies to get information. Wake up and do not carry on a dialogue with that verminous dirt bag.

[chabadnik attorney]

Ok sorry. I think I'm drunk

[nachos]

chabadnik attorney

did you see the response post I left you

[neighbor girl]

As I said before, why wasn't Elizabeth Billmeyer called to testify? She's been nearby at the Bremer County Jail. What happened to the child labor charges against her and others? I'm sorry I don't remember names, but I think there were charges against another HR employee and a manager. I haven't heard that they were dropped.
Also, her sentence to a year and a day has been cut to 8 months. Any news about that?

[Vindicated]

yidandahalf are you sure you're not sandra posting under another pseudonym? At any rate, thanks to you/sandra for "seriously" answering my comment? My point(missed on you) was that you have zero command of the English language! Why would any of the Rubashkins seek info here? It appears the owner of this site has made his position(s) on the Rubashkins abundantly clear.

I do feel sorry for sandra too. She needs to seek help for her pervasive anger and bitterness issues.

[Vindicated]

neighbor girl, do you think it would have been wise for the state to call 2 witnesses who were currently serving jail time? What does it matter at this point anyway? The state had NO case.

[Vindicated]

sandra, did you realize that you're not text messaging on this site? Your writing says you may not realize that. For those who haven't lost their sense of humor, don't feel bad about laughing and joking. Its good for the soul.

[effie]

He's innocent!!!! Just like OJ! LOL

Now's the time to enact new laws to put an end to this crap and make the employer have strict liability.

Anyway, it's all a wash because the state wasn't going to sentence consecutively to the feds which will be the greater sentence.

Nothing lost here in the justice department...

[FirstGenerationBavarianAmerican]

Neighbor Girl:
Here is from a post I am drafting: "Back around May 4th, charges against Abraham Rubashkin and Laura Althouse were dropped. Charges against Elizabeth Billmeyer and Karina Freund were separated for a out of court settlement."

[effie]

"We will bring down PITA and these conservative movments. "

I think it's time to get rid of all these kosher laws. They are not more humane. They are not healthier. They are designed to grease palms.

[yidandahalf]

vindicated, you are a lackey of the Rubash-ins. Go fuck yourself.

[sandra]

' vindicated ',

i don't need help . the one who needs help is YOU .

[concerned]

yeah time for a fabrengen

[effie]

"As you know, a lot of sentences get whittled down after sentencing, and that can be worked on behind the scenes once the noise dies down.
Posted by: WoolSilkCotton "

They get reduced as a result of sentencing error or when the defendant agrees to give somebody up. There's always a chance of sentencing error but as far as I can see, Judge Reade is very experienced and very good. So, who's he going to give up that is worth a significant reduction? Nobody I can think of.

[jerry]

Shmarya what effect do you think todays results will have on the sentencing in the fraud case.Also at this point what sentence do you predict for SMR?And do you give his appeal much of a chance?

[Shmarya]

Shmarya what effect do you think todays results will have on the sentencing in the fraud case.Also at this point what sentence do you predict for SMR?And do you give his appeal much of a chance?

It shouldn't impact the federal sentencing.

I think he'll get somewhere between 12 and 15 years, although he could get much more.

[Shmarya]

Shmarya what effect do you think todays results will have on the sentencing in the fraud case.Also at this point what sentence do you predict for SMR?And do you give his appeal much of a chance?

As for his appeal, it has to be based on a point of law.

I know there are several things the defense is looking at in this regard.

But the vast majority of appeals fail.

[Successful Messiah]

"In other words, the person ultimately responsible for those minors working in Agriprocessors according to Sholom Rubashkin is Heshy Rubashkin."

This entire post brings lying and deceit to uprecedented levels even by Failed Messiah standard, but the above statement takes the cake. The defense never, even once, sought to lay the blame on Heshy Rubashkin. The defense at all times claimed that senior management had no reason to know that any particular employee was a minor. They simply raised Heshy's area of responsibility as one additional basis to counter the prosecution's assertion that Sholom should have known. In effect, they were saying that even if the company should have known, which they did not admit, it was persons other than Sholom that should have known. Sitting in your armchair in you mother's basement, typing on a computer you bought with funds you raised supposedly to cover the Rubashkin trial, you have no way of knowing whether the jury found Sholom not guilty because they believed Heshy was responsible, because they believed none of management were responsible, or because they believed some other aspect of the defense's position. This is nothing more than your attempt to spin the verdict in a way that is least favorable to the Rubashkins without any basis at all.

[Shmarya]

Please.

The defense tried to show that workers had seen Heshy on the floor but not Sholom, and it also tried to show Heshy was in charge of HR.

You can spin this any way you'd like, I suppose, but it still means that Heshy was responsible.

[Friar Yid]

All that I know is that a not guilty verdict is better than a guilty verdict no matter how you spin it.

Better for WHO?

[Moshe]

There are witnesses who told Sholom Rubashkin about the minors. Those witnesses are credible, but the state did not call them.

shmarya -

Are you a clear thinking person? the state went all out, flew back illegals form Guatemala, persecuted Rubashkin in the court of public opinion etc. etc. now that the Jury found him innocent, SHMARYA wakes up that the state realy had REAL, CREDIBLE witnesses, but were too lazy to bring them forth. they were only able to produce self-confessed pathological lairs, drunks and child molesters...

So in the eyes of Shmarya, unless you have a judge like Lynda Read who blocks all of the defenses whitenesses from being head by the jury (in order in ensure an guilty verdict), if a jury comes back not-guilty against Rubashkin, it must be that the prosecutors botched it up and WILLFULLY didn't present the REAL, CREDIBLE evidence and wittinesses.

Very clear thinking and rational. Rubashkin is ALWAYS guilty in your playbook....

[Vindicated]

yidandahalf, such language, and on a religious site too!!

[Moshe]

All I did was point out that Sholom's defense was largely predicated on Heshy being guilty.

Shmarya, were YOU part of the jury? how do YOU know what lead to their verdict?

the only documented evidence as to what they were thinking is this:

"Quentin Hart, a Waterloo City Councilman who served as jury foreman, said that proved a high standard for the prosecution to meet.

"Hart said the jury largely remained on the same page throughout deliberations. He said a major influence on their verdict was the testimony of the alleged child laborers because they testified to lying about their ages to law enforcement officials and presenting false documents to Agriprocessors.

"“Each one of them indicated they didn’t tell the truth, and indicated they knew they had to be over the age of 18 to get a job, so they acquired documentation from somewhere,” he said.

"He also said the evidence never showed a clear line from Rubashkin to the 26 children named in the case. Evidence that the plant fired some minors when they were discovered, and that some minors were turned away, helped sway the jury, he said."

So Shmarya, it seems that the jury had trouble believing that Rubashkin willfully employed ANY minors. Stick to the facts.

[Shmarya]

Very clear thinking and rational. Rubashkin is ALWAYS guilty in your playbook....

Please.

I've known about these witnesses for a couple years already.

The state wouldn't spend the money necessary to bring them in.

It only brought in the minors because without them, there was no case.

The prosecution was inept.

As for "persecuting" Rubashkin in the court of public opinion, the state said almost nothing about this case.

One day the truth will come out, and you'll see that Sholom knew minors were working at Agriprocessors and Heshy knew, as well.

[Shmarya]

"He also said the evidence never showed a clear line from Rubashkin to the 26 children named in the case. Evidence that the plant fired some minors when they were discovered, and that some minors were turned away, helped sway the jury, he said."

>>>So Shmarya, it seems that the jury had trouble believing that Rubashkin willfully employed ANY minors. Stick to the facts.<<<

Do you always have poor reading comprehension or is it just poor when a Chabadnik is on trial?

The jury did not see a clear line between Sholom and the hiring of underage workers.

Why?

Because part of Sholom's defense was showing that Heshy was in charge of HR.

[Successful Messiah]

"The defense tried to show that workers had seen Heshy on the floor but not Sholom, and it also tried to show Heshy was in charge of HR."

Among other things, the defense also showed that they fired underage workers when identified. The defense also showed that the underage workers, with the assistance of their parents, went to great lengths to obtain false identifications and lie about their age in order to get a job at Agriprocessors. In short, this is nothing more than you deciding how you would like to sping this verdict and then report that as fact.

[nachos]

sucessful messiah:

So was this jury antisemitic?

[Successful Messiah]

"Because part of Sholom's defense was showing that Heshy was in charge of HR."

The operative term of that sentence, that Scotty doesn't want you to focus on, is "part." This was only part o Sholom's defense and in fact a rather small part of it as that. But Scotty would like you to believe that this is what drove the verdict so that he can hold on to the belief that the jury did not find that there was insufficient evidence to convict any Rubashkin on this. Now Scotty can simply drink himself into oblivion and imagine that Heshy was guilty and the whole problem here is that the incompetent prosecution charged the wrong Rubashkin. In short, we should all feel sorry for Scotty whose entire happiness is premised on the idea that he can believe that some Rubashkin was in fact guilty of these allegations that Scotty bought into.

[Shmarya]

Among other things, the defense also showed that they fired underage workers when identified.

They fired underage workers if those workers had bad documents and were clearly known as minors.

But Agriprocessors did not require these kids to show driver's licenses or other forms of hard-to-fake IDs. And agriprocessors had a workforce that was 75% undocumented.

The judge refused to allow the state to mention the latter, but the lack of asking for good IDs was brought into evidence.

If the state would have shown that Sholom knew minors were working in the plant (by bringing more witnesses who told him), I think he would have been convicted.

But Iowa has again proved that it cannot handle complex tasks, be they starving transient workers on Postville's streets in the dead of winter or mounting a successful prosecution against a man whose workforce was 75% undocumented workers.

[Successful Messiah]

"The state wouldn't spend the money necessary to bring them in.

It only brought in the minors because without them, there was no case."

Your stories are getting wilder by the day. You would like us to believe that the state wouldn't spend the money to bring in a single witness located in the U.S. who can testify directly that Sholom knew about the minors, but instead went ahead and paid for, was it 15? 20?, children to be transported in from outside the U.S. to be able to file duplicate charges of the same misdemeanor?

[Shmarya]

"Because part of Sholom's defense was showing that Heshy was in charge of HR."

The operative term of that sentence, that Scotty doesn't want you to focus on, is "part." This was only part o Sholom's defense and in fact a rather small part of it as that. But Scotty would like you to believe that this is what drove the verdict so that he can hold on to the belief that the jury did not find that there was insufficient evidence to convict any Rubashkin on this.

The jury foreman cited two reasons for the acquittal.

One of those reasons was the state failed to show a clear line of responsibility from Sholom to the hiring of the minors.

That was because the defense made the case that Heshy was in charge of HR, and because Derrik wasn't found credible by the jury.

But as I pointed out before, there were other witnesses, far more credible than Derrik, who told Sholom about the kids working in the plant.

And Sholom did nothing about it.

[Shmarya]

Your stories are getting wilder by the day. You would like us to believe that the state wouldn't spend the money to bring in a single witness located in the U.S. who can testify directly that Sholom knew about the minors, but instead went ahead and paid for, was it 15? 20?, children to be transported in from outside the U.S. to be able to file duplicate charges of the same misdemeanor?

If you actually had been following this and paying attention, you would have seen the AG had to get special permission to spend the money to bring in those kids.

The state cited money constraints.

And I know about these uncalled witnesses, and I've been led to believe the state did not call them due to cost.

[Moshe]

Shmarya, are the quotes below not true??? were not the local papers and others (including you) realing against the Rubashkins for YEARS???

"Indeed, the governor of Iowa in his op-ed in the Des Moine Register forgot it as well.

"He wrote: “Alarming information about working conditions at the Postville plant - including allegations ranging from the use of child labor in prohibited jobs to sexual and physical abuse by supervisors; from the nonpayment of regular and overtime wages to the denial of immediate medical attention for workplace injuries .. forces me to believe that.. this company’s owners have deliberately chosen to take the low road in its business practices.”

"Did the governor actually pen these words – that allegations have forced him to believe that the company’s owners have taken the low road? Since when do we convict a person or a company based upon allegations?

"And, even more sad to say, our own President was guilty of the very same thing – assuming and declaring Rubashkin’s guilt.

"On the campaign trail on August 25, 2008, Presidential candidate Barak Obama remarked,
“We’ve got to crack down on employers who are taking advantage of undocumented workers. When you read about a meatpacking plant hiring 13-year-olds, 14-year-olds – that is some of the most dangerous, difficult work there is. … They have kids in there wielding buzz saws and cleavers? It’s ridiculous. And the only reason they’re hiring these folks is because they want to avoid paying people decent wages and providing them decent benefits.”

"What? From the president?

"And a conviction it surely was. By the governor’s own admission he acted on these allegations, punishing the company without trial. Governor Culver wrote: “I directed Iowa Workforce Development Director Lis Buck to prevent Agriprocessors from listing open positions on state job-listings services..” The governor also explicitly stated that he directed state agencies to single out this company in aggressively pursuing violations of Iowa’s state laws to Agriprocessors. Enforcing the law is an admirable endeavor; enforcing laws selectively, however, is a travesty and mockery of the very idea of law and justice."

www.vosizneias.com/57275