The solicitor general of the Obama Administration is arguing against former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman’s appeal of his controversial bribery conviction to the Supreme Court.
The Friday development, first reported by the Birmingham News, hinges on the argument by Siegelman and co-defendant Richard Scrushy, former CEO of HealthSouth Corp., that their case throws into doubt standards for determining whether bribery has occurred.
The News reports on the Obama Adminstration’s counterargument that prosecutors in the case did prove “corrupt intent”:
But the solicitor general of the U.S., responding Friday on behalf of the prosecution team, said case law allows the jurors to infer, even from circumstantial evidence, that there was an agreement to exchange the money for the official action.
“Under a standard that requires not just a quid pro quo, but one that is verbally spelled out with all “i”s dotted and “t”s crossed, all but the most careless public officials will be able to avoid criminal liability for exchanging official action for campaign contributions,” prosecutors wrote.
(Via Main Justice)
