Rubashkin trial: Defense closing arguments under way
Blog post by Jens Krogstad • Des Moines Register
1:15 p.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Sholom Rubashkin’s defense team said the state built its case on the testimony of liars and thieves, and cannot prove that he allowed children to work at his family’s kosher slaughterhouse.
“What evidence has the state shown that Sholom Rubashkin intended minors to be in the plant? Not a shred,” said defense attorney Mark Weinhardt in a three-hour closing argument this morning.
The former Agriprocessors Inc executive faces 67 misdemeanor child labor charges and faces a sentence of up to 5 ½ years. The defense closed its case at noon today in a trial that has stretched into a fifth week.
Alleged child laborers who testified to working long hours and around dangerous machinery and chemicals were “practiced liars” about their identities who took advantage of an “underground illegal immigrant railroad” in Postville, Weinhardt said.
He argued the state pinned its case on two convicted thieves, Mark Spangler and Matthew Derrick, he provided some of the most damaging testimony against Rubashkin.
A third supervisor to testify for the state, Brian Griffith, couldn’t turn in a hardworking young man to authorities so he hid him, Weinhardt argued.
Weinhardt reminded the four-woman, three-man jury to put aside the troubling and disturbing testimony of the alleged child laborers, and focus on whether or not Rubashkin is criminally responsible to willfully allowing children in the plant.
Weinhardt said the case is solely about what Rubashkin actually knew, not about what he should have known.
He said prosecutors banked on the jury to being disturbed by the worker’s testimony of “hellish” conditions inside the plant.
“But let’s get one thing clear. No one in this courtroom thinks it was a good idea to have young people working in that plant,” he said.
He reminded the jury former supervisor Matthew Derrick didn’t mention the conversation he told the jury he had with Rubashkin in which he warned him about minors at the plant.
He told the jury of all the witnesses who contradicted his testimony. He reminded them that Derrick testified he cared deeply about his Latino workers, while another supervisor told the jury he wanted to “pack them up like sardines” and send them back to Mexico. Several people testified he was fired for laziness, Weinhardt said.
“Think about this man’s credibility, and whether what he said makes sense,” he said. “Here’s the bottom line: This conversation he claimed he had with Mr. Rubashkin, it didn’t happen. It did not happen.”
Defense attorney F. Montgomery Brown highlighted the testimony of managers Toby Bensasson and Gary Norris, who both said they never saw what they believed to be minors at the plant. They also said company policy was to not hire minor.
“Bensasson’s testimony alone, if you believe it, creates reasonable doubt in this matter. If you believe Toby Bensasson, start checking the boxes that say ‘not guilty.’ Game. Set. Match,” he said.
Brown takes off his suit coat and dons a white coat and white hard hat. He says people look different when they put on the plant’s safety gear.
“How do I like now? Can you tell hold I am?” he said
Both attorneys ended their arguments with a flourish. Weinhardt invoked John Adams, the nation’s second president, who said, “We are a nation of laws and not men.”
Brown referenced a literary American classic, “Moby Dick.” He called Rubashkin a stranger in a strange land in which the state rushed to judgment.“You can feel from the absence of evidence — and the evidence itself — that they rushed to the conclusion that he was responsible, this white whale. A Moby Jew,” Brown said.
12:00 p.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Weinhardt invoked John Adams, the nation’s second president: We are a nation of laws and not men.
He said the alleged child laborers came to the country for a better life because it’s a place where people get a fair shake and even the government plays by the rules, unlike in Latin America.
“The workers asked them what country they wanted to live in. now you have to ask yourselves, what country do you want to live in?” he said
The defense has rested its case. The jury will return at 1:30 p.m. to wrap up the trial.
11:55 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Weinhardt attacked the credibility of the state’s workers because they have U-visas being processed.
He argued the government can yank the visa if “they don’t like what they’re doing.”
“I’m not blaming them. But what are they going to do? They’re going to testify favorably to the state.”
The defense then put up the quote of a worker:
“They told me I needed to give testimony to stay in this country,” Yukary Hernandez said.
11:45 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Weinhardt said the state pinned its case on two convicted thieves, Mark Spangler and Matthew Derrick.
A third supervisor to testify for the state, Brian Griffith, couldn’t turn in a hardworking young man to authorities so he hid him, Weinhardt argued.
He said people at the plant saw the need in the workers’ eyes and couldn’t turn them away.
“There’s a very human thing going on this plant. This underground human railroad,” he said.
11:35 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Weinhardt urged the jury to try to make the evidence connect directly and personally to Rubashkin.
“They can’t do it. They don’t do it,” he said. “This, ladies and gentleman, was a rush to judgement.”
He called the witnesses who testified to working underaged as “practiced liars” about their age, making it nearly impossible to determine their true ages.
11:25 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. —Weinhardt said the state has argued Rubashkin could see the minors and somebody told him about them.
He placed a slide on the overhead of 900 boxes with “x” marks inside each one. Then he highlighted 26 with red “x” marks, which represent the 26 alleged child laborers.
“They’re virtually impossible to distinguish,” he said, raising his voice and flapping his arms at times.
In perhaps the biggest workforce investigation in the state’s history, Weinhardt said not a single witness said Rubashkin knew of minors at the plant.
“There was not one. The investigation did not turn up a single witness. That all by itself provides reasonable doubt,” he said.
He reminded the jury former supervisor Matthew Derrick didn’t mention the conversation he told the jury he had with Rubashkin about minors at the plant.
He told the jury of all the witnesses who contradicted his testimony. He reminded them that Derrick testified he cared deeply about his Latino workers, even while another supervisor testified he wanted to “pack them up like sardines” and send them back to Mexico. He reminded them that several people testified he was fired for laziness.
“Think about this man’s credibility, and whether what he said makes sense,” he said. “Here’s the bottom line: This conversation he claimed he had with Mr. Rubashkin, it didn’t happen. It did not happen.”
Weinhardt questioned why none of the key human resources employees were brought to testify. He told the jury the state promised to bring forward their testimony.
“Why didn’t they do that? Because those witnesses can’t help the state,” he said.
11:15 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — “What evidence has the state shown that Sholom Rubashkin intended minors to be in the plant? Not a shred,” Weinhardt said.
Weinhardt said the state has argued Rubashkin could see the minors and somebody told him about them.
He placed a slide on the overhead of 900 boxes with “x” marks inside each one. Then he highlighted 26 with red “x” marks, which represent the 26 alleged child laborers.
“They’re virtually impossible to distinguish,” he said, raising his voice and flapping his arms at times.
He then reminded the jury of an Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation agent who could only identify photographs minors half the time when the defense showed him dozens of pictures of young Latinos.
11:05 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Weinhardt said this case was personal. The prosecution tried to put Agriprocessors on trial and paint Rubashkin with that same brush. He said that means it doesn’t matter if a supervisor hid a minor from labor investigators, or if a manager told minors to lie about their age.
“What evidence was there that Sholom knew of the attempts to frustrate them, or told them to frustrate them?” he said of the labor investigators.
Weinhardt said this case was also personal because of the severity of the charges.
“He’s defending a charge that as far as business crimes go, is as ugly as it can be. Because what you’re deciding here today will hang over him for the rest of his life.”
10:52 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Weinhardt reminded the jury to put aside the troubling and disturbing testimony of the alleged child laborers and focus on whether or not Rubashkin is criminally responsible to willfully allowing children in the plant.
“Willfully is the most important word in the case, and it applies to each count in the case,” he said.
He told the jury prosecutors would the jury to be disturbed by the worker testimony.
“But let’s get one thing clear. No one in this courtroom thinks it was a good idea to have young people working in that plant.”
This is not about what he should have known, he said. It’s about what he actually knew, even if people kept things from him, he said.
Weinhardt argued it’s not enough for him to know that minors were in the plant. He also had to intend for there to be minors in the plant. He had to have minors in the plant on purpose, he said.
“That’s how you decide this case,” he said.
10:25 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Court is on break for 15 minutes. Defense attorney Mark Weinhardt will present the last half of the defense’s closing argument.
10:20 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — He said proof exists that Agriprocessors, and in turn Rubashkin, didn’t want to hire more minors by the actions of human resources manager Elizabeth Billmeyer during a child labor investigation.
“Because while they were being investigated by these guys, she hires more minors. While they’re being investigated for this serious act, she lets them in under her nose,” Brown said.
He said what happened was Agriprocessors became big fish in a small pond, and then Brown went all literary on the jury for his big finish:
“The stranger in strange land. He became the white whale. You can feel from the absence of evidence and the evidence itself that they rushed to the conclusion that he was responsible, this white whale. Moby Jew.”
He said others ran the plant while he was left “to be harpooned.”
10:05 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Brown is going over more e-mails and documents that shows Rubashkin wanted to reduce payroll, and on a list of possible layoffs includes several minors who testified in trial.
He said the state canceled a meeting in April 2008 related to a subpoena from the department of labor about minors at the plant.
“Who canceled the meeting,” he emphasizes.
He said the department of labor knew at least one person, Mario Lopez, was under 18 and “they let him go back in there.”
Brown keeps coming back to the fact that the state never proved what it said it would in opening statements.
The state said it was going to prove a scheme to hire minors, Brown contends, but they instead marched up a couple dozen minors over several weeks. He said they didn’t bring forward anyone in the human resources department to testify because a scheme to hire minors didn’t exist.
9:55 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Brown said there’s no evidence Rubashkin knew the names of any of the alleged minors who testified. Rubashkin didn’t attend weekly management meetings attended by Elizabeth Billmeyer because she reported to his brother, Heshy.
He said the state couldn’t find one plant inspector who worked at agriprocessors daily to say minors obviously worked at the plant
“Where are those people? We’ve been here a month. They’ve had two years. Where are those people?” Brown said.
He said with all the allegations swirling around, he had no motive to willingly allow minors inside the plant.
“Does he look like an idiot? He may not have always been a very good manager, but do you think he’d really put these people in there with all this going on?”
9:45 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Brown is now questioning the credibility of someone of the witnesses who testified they worked as minors. He points out one was already balding, while a couple of the young women who testified had children who were American citizens.
He points to a newspaper picture in which one of the witnesses is walking down the street with her husband and young child “acting as if they were adults.”
“Can you really tell?” he said.
He says the human resources director, Elizabeth Billmeyer, was not permitted by law to request a driver’s license as additional prove of identification if an applicant showed what she believed to be a valid permanent residence card.
He said the jury must think critically of some witness testimony because the stakes are too high.
“His reputation for the rest of his life, frankly, hangs in the balance. Whatever else is out there pales in comparison to the allegation that he wanted children in his father’s plant.”
He makes a list: All the witnesses had the same lawyer, all said they forgot giving interviews to state investigators, all are trying to get visas.
He said a witness who claimed to process 90 chickens, was in fact doing so with the help of an entire team.
Henry Lopez never told anyone he was coughing up blood before he took the stand, Brown said.
“It was a just an exaggeration they knew had to be false, but they through it out there anyway,” Brown said. “Don’t put an agenda over truth.”
9:33 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Brown takes off his suit coat and dons a white coat and white hard hat. He says people look different when they put on the plant’s safety gear.
“How do I like now? Can you tell hold I am?” he said
He says the jury can’t dismiss testimony from a Jewish mother and young man who said they couldn’t get jobs for minors at Agriprocessors. He pointed out that not a single Hispanic parent testified they were treated differently.
“You can’t just dismiss their testimony because they’re Jews,” he said.
He shows pictures of former workers arrested in immigration raid side-by-side. The younger-looking one is an adult, and the one who looks older is a minor.
He points to a picture of a burly minor and he said “you’d hire as your bodyguard.”
“How old are they? You can’t really tell,” he said.
9:21 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Brown calls Agriprocessors an underground illegal immigrant railroad made possible by desperate people who lied to everyone about their identities and immigration status.
“He didn’t see anyone he believed were minors at the plant. He trusted HR was doing their job,” he said.
He pointed to several e-mails and testimony from top managers that proves Agriprocessors had a policy of not hiring minors.
He highlighted the testimony of managers Toby Bensasson and Gary Norris, who both said they never saw what they believed to be minors at the plant. They also said company policy was to not hire minor.
Toby Bensasson’s testimony alone, if you believe it, creates reasonable doubt in this matter. If you believe Toby Bensasson, start checking the boxes that say ‘not guilty.’ Game. Set. Match.”
9:15 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Defense attorney F. Montgomery Brown starts off by telling the jury Sholom Rubashkin is, at his core, just like them.
“He’s a man, he’s a family man. Her wife, she could be your neighbor. The only difference with her is she just believes in a different way of praying to god.
“He takes his kids to Disney world. He’s just like us, he just looks different and believe in god a little different way.”
9:10 a.m., Waterloo, Ia. — Sholom Rubashkin’s defense team will begin its closing arguments in a few minutes. Their argument will be split between two attorneys.
Yesterday the prosecution rested its case. It told the jury the Rubashkin for nearly two years ignored repeated warnings of child laborers inside Agriprocessors, the kosher slaughterhouse in Postville he oversaw.
Rubashkin faces 67 misdemeanor child labor charges. He allegedly allowed children to work excessive hours and around dangerous machinery and chemicals at the plant.