Silver Maple
Postdoc
Posts: 3765
Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
|
07-25-18 11:54 AM - Post#259438
In response to Okoro Dude
What he said. Jerome should have known better, and almost certainly did. If he didn't, that's probably even worse.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32685
Reg: 11-21-04
|
07-25-18 11:55 AM - Post#259439
In response to Okoro Dude
I agree with you. I think the real question here is whether this was a one-off or not. And I think that is the reason the University is bringing in an outside law firm to investigate.
|
Stuart Suss
PhD Student
Posts: 1439
Loc: Chester County, Pennsylva...
Reg: 11-21-04
|
07-25-18 12:53 PM - Post#259444
In response to palestra38
The best way to determine whether this was a one-off or not is for outside counsel to question Jerome. However, Jerome is:
1) an unindicted coconspirator in an honest services fraud case in which, for now, he is the key government witness,
2) nominally vulnerable to prosecution under Pennsylvania's commercial bribery statute, Title 18, Section 4708, although it is unlikely that the current District Attorney of Philadelphia would charge him, and
3) vulnerable to prosecution under the federal Travel Act, Ttile 18, Section 1952, with the state commercial bribery violation as the predicate "unlawful activity,"
and that assumes that the income from the bribes was properly reported on tax returns.
So, isn't Jerome required to "take the 5th" if questioned by outside counsel for the university? And doesn't this preclude any public explanation or apology by Jerome in the near future?
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32685
Reg: 11-21-04
|
07-25-18 01:12 PM - Post#259445
In response to Stuart Suss
Well, of course one can waive the Fifth Amendment right to be silent. And his job considerations with the Celtics may compel him to speak. I do not believe he is liable (potentially) under the Travel Act as a commercial bribery violation does not fit the definition of "unlawful activity" as I read 18 U.S.C.1952(b). But I agree that unless the Celtics require it, he is unlikely to talk about this. However, it should not be hard for investigators to look at other marginal players he recruited and investigate for payoffs.
All of this being said, I cannot see any kind of innocent explanation for this, and that includes "I didn't know it was wrong." (not that that is a defense).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Td67kYY9mdQ
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32685
Reg: 11-21-04
|
07-25-18 03:00 PM - Post#259450
In response to palestra38
Let me correct myself on commercial bribery not being a predicate for a Travel Act violation. I was relying in my head on a line of cases that was overruled. So I stand corrected--kudos to Stu Suss.
I still don't think it likely that he would be federally prosecuted for this standing alone, however.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8141
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
07-25-18 04:20 PM - Post#259460
In response to palestra38
I’m pretty sure in the unlikely event of prosecution on state charges, it would be referred to the PA state AG very quickly. Have to believe he cuts a witness deal with the Feds.
|
Stuart Suss
PhD Student
Posts: 1439
Loc: Chester County, Pennsylva...
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Article: Jerome Took Bribes at Penn 07-25-18 07:41 PM - Post#259470
In response to Streamers
Here is the text of the indictment filed on July 19. The relevant allegations are found on pages 32-36.
Although the hyperlink is correct, the legal citation in my earlier post is incorrect. Pennsylvania's commercial bribery statute is found at Title 18, Section 4108.
|
QuakerShaker
Freshman
Posts: 59
Loc: West Coast
Reg: 02-04-10
|
07-27-18 12:26 AM - Post#259517
In response to Okoro Dude
Public action for what? Being anonymously referred to in an indictment that didn’t even focus on this issue? If the US Attorney’s Office in PHL or the local state prosecutor wants to open an investigation and seek an indictment, that’s a different story (and may we’ll be what comes next). This is bad news for Penn but not exactly a concern for the Celtics at this stage.
Too many armchair lawyers on this thread speculating about things they know nothing about. Forunatrly, some of us (probably 20% since this is Penn) actually practice.
When are we going to put in Solomito? |
|
QuakerShaker
Freshman
Posts: 59
Loc: West Coast
Reg: 02-04-10
|
07-27-18 12:28 AM - Post#259518
In response to Streamers
More idiocy. Witness to what? Esformes stands accused of a massive Medicare fraud, with witnesses already having testified to the grand jury. A $53k bribe for his son to go to college is a sideshow to the indictment. Allen will not get anything of the sort. You’re dreaming.
When are we going to put in Solomito? |
|
QuakerShaker
Freshman
Posts: 59
Loc: West Coast
Reg: 02-04-10
|
07-27-18 12:33 AM - Post#259519
In response to palestra38
Penn is bringing in an investigation firm to determine the veracity of allegations that one of its highest profile employees committed a felony while acting in his capacity as a university employee. There are potential repurcussions for Penn, ranging from NCAA sanctions and bad press to being subpoenaed.
Whether the incident was isolated or systemic is an interesting question, but it’s not why Penn is investigating. Nor does it truly matter. If he did what they say he did, he’s up shits creek and the program should be sanctioned. I’m not sure that changes if he did it twice...
When are we going to put in Solomito? |
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32685
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Article: Jerome Took Bribes at Penn 07-27-18 09:30 AM - Post#259526
In response to QuakerShaker
If you claim to practice, you should know that commercial bribery is a misdemeanor under PA law. Not a felony. Stu Suss and I were simply discussing whether it could be a predicate act under the Travel Act and agreed that while it could, it is extremely unlikely.
As for the rest of the people here, there are expressions of amazement that Allen could have thought that accepting cash from a recruit's father (even assuming he didn't know that the recruit simply wanted an easier route into admission) was a breach of loyalty to the University. I don't see to much armchair lawyering going on---just a discussion by people who care about the University and the basketball program about a very questionable series of actions that really have no legitimate explanation.
|
Okoro Dude
Senior
Posts: 309
Loc: Glen Mills, PA
Reg: 11-24-04
|
07-27-18 12:07 PM - Post#259547
In response to QuakerShaker
Silliness on your part.
I'm not a lawyer, I'm a businessman. I wouldn't trust or tolerate an employee who was anonymously referred to in an indictment for taking bribes in a previous position. I will be surprised if the Celtics, who have their pick of many talented coaches to fill his role, will ultimately see this any differently.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1878
Reg: 11-29-04
|
07-27-18 01:04 PM - Post#259551
In response to Okoro Dude
I'll do a bit of armchair work here - but not exactly lawyering. Call it game theory. The way I see it, someone needs motivation to go after Allen. Accepting a bribe is certainly not kosher whether it is a misdemeanor or criminal level offense. The local or federal prosecutors may have motivation to chase this down, but I doubt they would bother because the victim isn't clear - unless they need Allen as a witness against Esformes or for a general PR purpose about being tough. The real victim is an unknown person who got rejected from Penn (or from the basketball team) because Esformes's kid took the spot. No one knows who this victim is.
The other potential victim is the University - employees are not supposed to be taking bribes. It harms the integrity of the University's athletics and admissions processes, and the overall reputation of the school. The outcome here (I believe) depends on whether the University goes after Allen, which would force the hand of law enforcement. The University investigation will tell a lot. I am picturing a university board or leadership meeting where they discuss the cost and merit of going after Allen. I can see it going either way - setting an example vs. the cost and PR impact. I'm going to guess they go for a quiet solution, but it isn't clear cut.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32685
Reg: 11-21-04
|
07-27-18 01:11 PM - Post#259552
In response to Penndemonium
That's a good analysis and I agree with it. I only think that the University is the primary victim in that their employee took a bribe which compromised his loyalty to the University to act in the best interest of his employer, not himself and the briber/briber's son. It raises the question of whether this was a one-off or not, as well. The University will investigate and if it was a one time thing, given what has happened, it probably will let it go. If this occurred more than once, I think there will be a lawsuit.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8141
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
07-27-18 02:53 PM - Post#259554
In response to QuakerShaker
More idiocy. Witness to what? Esformes stands accused of a massive Medicare fraud, with witnesses already having testified to the grand jury. A $53k bribe for his son to go to college is a sideshow to the indictment. Allen will not get anything of the sort. You’re dreaming.
I didn’t say it would happen. I only said if local charges were to be brought against Allen, the state AG not the local DA would handle it.
|
QuakerShaker
Freshman
Posts: 59
Loc: West Coast
Reg: 02-04-10
|
07-27-18 03:44 PM - Post#259556
In response to Streamers
All true. This pot just needed a good stir.
As someone wisely raised earlier, the easiest case here is likely to be tax evasion. Will be curious to learn if JA booked this as income for services or didn’t disclose it. Since the payment allegedly came from a nursing home and not from the dad, it will be hard to have claimed it as service income.
C’s can always fire him, it would just be without cause and they would have to pay him severance if that’s what his contract provides. They can definitely question him about it and terminate him for cause if he isn’t cooperative. But the allegation alone isn’t grounds for a for cause firing.
When are we going to put in Solomito? |
|
AsiaSunset
Postdoc
Posts: 4350
Reg: 11-21-04
|
07-27-18 04:54 PM - Post#259558
In response to QuakerShaker
Don’t think anyone gets charged with tax evasion over 76k but he may get a bill for back taxes and interest penalties
|
Go Green
PhD Student
Posts: 1124
Age: 52
Reg: 04-22-10
|
07-27-18 07:32 PM - Post#259563
In response to AsiaSunset
Don’t think anyone gets charged with tax evasion over 76k but he may get a bill for back taxes and interest penalties
This site says that the unofficial minimum for potential criminal liability is $70K.
https://www.optimataxrelief.com/criminal-charges/
If I were Jerome, I would not be breathing easy..
|
omegahouse
Freshman
Posts: 84
Reg: 12-06-04
|
07-27-18 11:01 PM - Post#259568
In response to Go Green
Well, from a purely “let’s view all this from fifteen thousand feetâ€, if we have or garner any information regarding IRS issues, something is truly amiss (privacy requirements and all that sticky sort of nonsense........).
|
AsiaSunset
Postdoc
Posts: 4350
Reg: 11-21-04
|
07-28-18 09:57 AM - Post#259570
In response to omegahouse
The IRS doesn’t go after these types for tax evasion. They will hit you with back tax assessments, put liens on your house etc and often settle for much less just to clear the file
|