Former Chief Deputy Prosecutor Gets Probation, No Prison Time For Taking Bribe To Spring Convicted Murderer From Prison

If you are a corrupt prosecutor, there is no better place to ply your trade in all of America than Indiana. After U.S. Attorney Joe Hogsett declined to seek charges against former Marion Co. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi for soliciting campaign contributions and real estate interests in exchange for lenient plea deals and sentence reductions, a federal judge has decided that Brizzi's chief deputy, David Wyser, should serve no time in prison after he pleaded guilty to accepting a bribe in the form of a campaign contribution in exchange for agreeing to a sentence modification that allowed a woman convicted of hiring a hit man to kill her husband to be freed from prison after serving only 18 years of her 70-year sentence. Brizzi accepted $30,000 in campaign contributions from the woman's father before she was released from prison but claimed that he had no idea the father was seeking a sentence modification for his jailed daughter despite agreeing to a deal rarely if ever granted to convicted murderers. Instead, Wyser receives just 6 months home detention and three years probation. Compare that to the 40-month sentence in federal prison meted out to former IMPD officer and City-County Councilor Lincoln Plowman after he was convicted of soliciting a bribe from an undercover FBI agent. Wyser is credited for assisting in the investigation of his boss, which essentially consisted of rolling over and taking all of the blame for his actions. It makes a complete mockery of the criminal justice system in Indiana, but that's the way it rolls here in the Hoosier state where there are two criminal justice systems: one for the corrupt ruling elites who are above the law and can do as they please; and one for the rest of us who are expected to abide by the letter of the law or face stiff prosecution.

UPDATE: It looks like Judge Sarah Evans Barker has the same questions as me concerning the reason the U.S. Attorney's Office let other criminal wrongdoers off the hook and charged only Wyser. “There are sure a lot of people who did not act honorably,” Fox59 News' Russ McQuaid quotes Judge Barker as saying.  “Lawyers, other prosecutors who were not acting with the highest legal, moral and ethical duties." She added, “(Wyser) shouldn’t be scapegoated for all the other questionable behavior.” Wyser is also miffed that only he was single out for prosecution by Hogsett's office:

“Lukemeyer…and Epperly…all these guys skated,” said an embittered Wyser whose guilty plea will result in the only conviction of the federal investigation into prosecutor’s office corruption. “They all gave lies and made up lies about their involvement. Lukemeyer lied to cover her butt. The truth is she knew what was going on here. She asked me if I wanted the reward of redoing the modification and I accepted that.

“I appreciate the judge’s comments and clearly she was able to see through Hogsett’s tactics when he made a statement a couple weeks ago that he didn’t have enough evidence or insufficient evidence to go after Carl Brizzi. I think anybody who is in the system knows that is completely disingenuous. There was plenty of evidence supported by the documents that they filed in my case.”

The sister of the man whose life Paula Willoughby ended before her father paid a bribe to spring her from prison feels exactly how every ordinary Hoosier should feel about the corruption in the office of Joe Hogsett that allowed these scoundrels to skate for their crimes:

 Darrell Willoughby’s sister disagreed with what Wyser did…but she found agreement in what he said.

“When you’re a politician, a lawyer, someone with money, you’re not going to do time,” she said after addressing the court. “You’re not going to be held accountable. The state will do whatever it can to protect you because they don’t send these kind of boys to jail.

“When you’re playing hardball with these boys in politics, you do not stand a chance as a common person. You don’t.”

If we had a legitimate news media in this town, they would be demanding Hogsett's resignation for the gross misconduct of his office in handling the prosecution of this major public corruption case and demand answers about who he is protecting through negligent, if not deliberate, mishandling of public corruption investigations being conducted by the FBI and the Justice Department's public integrity office. Instead, they will be touting the man for yet another run for public office. This is precisely why any respectable FBI agent has no desire to work in the Indianapolis office. The U.S. Attorney's Office is always run by political hacks who do everything they can to protect the corrupt political establishment that runs this state. And what about Marion Co. Prosecutor Terry Curry? If Wyser pleaded guilty to allowing a sentence modification to be procured through payment of a bribe to spring Willoughby from prison, why the hell has he not petitioned the court to reinstate her former sentence? The sentence modification should be null and void once it's determined that it was procured through the commission of a bribe.

Hogsett Seeks Lenient Sentence For Wyser Due To Cooperation

U.S. Attorney Joe Hogsett is asking a federal judge to mete out a lenient sentence for the former chief deputy of the Marion County Prosecutor's Office, who pleaded guilty earlier this year to accepting a bribe in exchange for springing a convicted murderer from prison. Court documents filed in the case and discussed by Star reporter Tim Evans reveal just how corrupt the legal system has become in this city and state and the cavalier treatment given to public corruption cases by Hogsett's office. Hogsett claims a lenient sentence is warranted because Wyser cooperated with federal investigators. To the contrary, court documents prove that Wyser only cooperated after a corrupt attorney admitted her role in soliciting a bribe from him, which were confirmed by numerous e-mail exchanges that he had unsuccessfully attempted to destroy that were recovered by FBI investigators.

David Wyser told federal investigators that when he decided to accept a $2,500 bribe while acting as the chief deputy prosecutor under Carl Brizzi in exchange for granting a sentence modification to spring convicted murderer Paula Willoughby from prison, he asked his boss, about $30,000 in contributions he had already received from Willoughby's father, Harrison Epperly, over a several year period that criminal defense attorney Jennifer Lukemeyer had been prodding the prosecutor's office to free her client from prison. According to Wyser, Brizzi claimed that he had no knowledge of Willoughby's prior campaign contributions or who he even was. Despite discussing the matter with him, Wyser claims that he unilaterally made the decision to grant a rare sentence modification with Brizzi's consent. Wyser says he acted alone in soliciting the $2,500 bribe from Lukemeyer, who contacted her client and got him to write out a check to Wyser's campaign committee for his bid to become Hamilton County prosecutor.

According to a memorandum filed with the federal district court by Hogsett's office, Wyser had told the original attorney hired by Willoughby's father that the office as a matter of policy never agreed to sentence modifications in murder cases. Wyser sent that attorney a letter dated March 7, 2006 in which he denied the request, telling Willoughby's attorney that the prosecutor's office would not consider a sentence modification until Willoughby had served the minimum sentence. When Brizzi ran for re-election in 2006, Harrison Epperly wrote two separate checks to his campaign committee totaling $25,000. After Epperly told the first attorney about the campaign contributions and the fact that he had met in person with the prosecutor to discuss his daughter's case, the first attorney referred Epperly to Lukemeyer because of her closer working relationship with Brizzi and Wyser. In 2007, Lukemeyer met at a downtown restaurant with Wyser to discuss the sentence modification and mentioned to him the fact that her client's father had made the large campaign contributions to Brizzi and had spoken to him. Wyser told Lukemeyer that he would need time to think about the matter.

Reflecting the casual relationship Lukemeyer had with Wyser, she sent a follow-up e-mail to him after her meeting on March 14, 2007 in which she stated: "Hey, let's talk soon about Paula Willoughby and how to, or if we even can, resolve that issue. I am just jealous that my partners are taking all of your time, and I want some attention too! Talk to you soon." One of Lukemeyer's partners is high-profile criminal defense lawyer Jim Voyles, who has a close relationship with Joe Hogsett. The following day Wyser replied to Lukeymeyer's e-mail to ask her to remind him of the name of her client's father. When she responded that it was her client's father, Wyser asked to confirm that the size of the contribution was "$25K." Lukemeyer responded, "Yes it was. Just a drop in the bucket!"

During follow-up discussions, Wyser had considered seeking the appointment of a special prosecutor to hear Willoughby's request since he believe it had merit and that would eliminate the appearance of impropriety if a sentence modification was later granted. He later told Lukemeyer that the prosecutor's office would move forward with approving the case without seeking a special prosecutor. According to the document, Lukemeyer and Wyser disagreed over whether Wyser indicated to her that he was comfortable with Epperly continuing to be a donor to Brizzi's campaign committee. He says he didn't agree to that; she says he did. After Wyser filed paperwork to run for Hamilton Co. prosecutor in November, 2007, Lukemeyer sent an e-mail to Wyser inquiring about it. In a follow-up e-mail and phone call, Wyser discussed with Lukemeyer how she could help out with his campaign and mentioned that Epperly needed to make a donation to his campaign.

Discussions about Willoughby's sentence modification resumed in January, 2008 when Lukemeyer sent Wyser an e-mail titled, "Free Paula." Wyser replied, "[I]s that something like 'free willy'?" Lukemeyer responded, "Well yes, and didn't you feel all warm and fuzzy after Willy got free? You'll get the same feeling when Paula is free too!" Wyser asked, "What will Paula do to make me feel warm and fuzzy?" He added, "Stay really, really, really quite (sic) about this little modification."

In late January, 2008, Epperly scheduled a meeting with Wyser at the prosecutor's office. Lukemeyer professed ignorance of the request when Wyser later discussed it, telling him that she told Epperly not to speak to him directly. Wyser assured her it was okay and went ahead with the meeting, which lasted for approximately 40 minutes. After the meeting, Lukemeyer sent Wyser an e-mail in which she told him that Epperly told her that he was "the best thing since sliced bread." Lukemeyer claims that she later spoke on the phone with Wyser and he assured her nothing would prevent the sentence modification from going forward, including additional campaign contributions. On the same day that Lukemeyer exchanged text messages with Epperly, he made another campaign contribution in the amount of $500 to Brizzi. In March, 2008, in response to another e-mail Lukemeyer sent to Wyser titled "Free Paula," Wyser solicited a campaign contribution for his campaign. Lukemeyer said she was talking to Epperly at that moment. Wyser wrote, "You should convince him to write a check on behalf of the whales." Lukemeyer responded that he would "whip out that checkbook of his" if he thought it would do any good. Lukemeyer proposes timing the sentence modification to July, 2009 when her client will have served a full term for one of the counts against her. As their conversations continued, Wyser told Lukemeyer that he would talk to Brizzi. Epperly shortly thereafter wrote another $2,500 campaign contribution to Brizzi's campaign.

On May 29, 2009, Wyser called Lukemeyer and communicated to her that Epperly needed to make a contribution to his campaign and asked her to communicate that message to him. Lukemeyer relayed the request and the same day Epperly wrote out a check to Wyser's campaign for $2,500. Wyser's campaign deposited the check on June 22, 2009. On June 23, 2009, the sentence modification for Willoughby was filed in the Marion Superior Court, which provided an early release date of July 2, 2009 for Willoughby. On August 25, 2009, Lukemeyer hosted a fundraiser in her home for Wyser at which she says he asked her to tell Epperly to contribute $5,000 more to his campaign. In January, 2010, media reports first reported the unusual sentence modification granted to Willoughby and the size and timing of the campaign contributions made to Brizzi's and Wyser's campaign committees. In some media reports, Wyser lied about his knowledge of Epperly's previous campaign contributions. Lukemeyer contacted Wyser to warn him about their past e-mails. He assured her that his e-mail account had been purged. Investigators found about 60 e-mails Wyser had deleted from his e-mail account that were later recovered.

If you believe Brizzi's claim that he knew nothing about someone who contributed $30,000 to his campaign committee, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn I will sell you. Nonetheless, that was good enough for U.S. Attorney Joe Hogsett's office to decide not to bring charges against Brizzi after a three-year investigation, Lukeymeyer, despite e-mails that documented her direct role in payment of the bribe to Wyser, and Epperly, the man who actually paid the bribe to Wyser.

Hogsett's office's claims about Wyser's cooperation are laughable. He first lied about the bribe before purging e-mails that proved his solicitation of the bribe, which represented felony obstruction of justice. He only cooperated after Lukemeyer started singing to federal prosecutors about her dealings with the prosecutor's office in order to save her own ass and after investigators were able to recover the e-mails Wyser had attempted to destroy. He then exonerated his boss of any wrongdoing despite clear evidence that he said he was communicating throughout this period of time with his boss about the case and had received his consent to go forward with the sentence modification even after questions had been raised about the earlier contributions Epperly had made to Brizzi's campaign. Both Wyser and Brizzi are clearly lying about Brizzi's involvement in the bribery scheme.

In the fixing of the Mobarecki drug case, Wyser makes clear that he knew of Brizzi's business relationship with Mobarecki's attorney and the fact that Brizzi had ordered the lenient plea deal opposed by him and other deputy prosecutors, along with the return of money police had seized from Mobarecki at the time of his arrest to be used to pay Page's legal fees for representing Mobarecki. Wyser denies that he knew that Brizzi had been given a 50% stake in the Elkhart building Page had purchased with borrowed funds, or the profits that Page and Brizzi had earned from the deal to lease the property to the state's Department of Child Services. Wyser claimed that Brizzi never linked his business ties to Page to his decision to order lenient sentencing for Mobarecki.

I don't know how anyone could have any confidence in the legal system in this county and state after the actions of the state's largest prosecutor's office and the total mishandling of the prosecution of this corruption by the U.S. Attorney's Office in the northern and southern districts of Indiana. There is clearly an elite group of legal players who are above the law and can pretty much do what they damn well please, while other attorneys face a death sentence to their legal careers for the most minor of transgressions that have absolutely no impact whatsoever on the administration of justice. I would note that I am naming Jennifer Lukemeyer and Harrison Epperly in this blog post, something Hogsett would not do in his official filings with the court in order to protect their reputations. It's his reputation that he should be concerned about. He has very little credibility left after his complete mishandling of this case.

Someone in the Justice Department needs to explain to the people of Indiana why our federal prosecutors use a different standard entirely for prosecuting public corruption cases than other districts throughout this country. If the Chicago U.S. Attorney's Office applied the Hogsett standard, neither former Gov. George Ryan nor Gov. Rod Blagojevich would have been prosecuted. It's also very curious that the NSA is spying on all our private e-mails and phone conversations, but the U.S. Attorney's Office in Indianapolis will not seek the court's permission to wiretap phones in order to prosecute public officials in Indiana. Here's a clue, Joe. Look up the meaning of honest services fraud. If you don't believe you have sufficient evidence to prosecute for bribery, you sure as hell can indict these corrupt bastards under the honest services fraud statute just like they've done in multiple cases in Chicago. You're not using the tools at your disposal because you are protecting people in order to advance your own political career. You're no better than Susan Brooks, who dumped well-investigated cases in the wastebasket to protect people she would rely upon to advance her political and professional career. What don't you explain to the public, Joe, why your office ignores all of the collateral corruption involving convicted Ponzi schemer Tim Durham that touches on some of the most powerful people in this city and state? Who are you protecting, Joe?

Brizzi's Decision Not To Put On Defense In Charlie White Case Based On His Doubts About Wife's Testimony

Arguments by the attorney representing former Secretary of State Charlie White in his petition for post-conviction relief resumed today in Hamilton Superior Court Judge Daniel Pfleging's courtroom with testimony from White's trial attorney, Carl Brizzi. In February, 2012, White was forced to give up his office after a jury found him guilty on six of seven vote fraud-related charges arising out of prosecutors' claims that he voted illegally once by casting a vote in the 2010 primary election in a precinct in which he didn't reside. White's attorney, Andrea Ciobanu, is arguing that White received ineffective counsel from Brizzi, the former Marion Co. Prosecutor. Ciobanu blames Brizzi's failure to put on a defense in the case by calling any witnesses as the main reason jurors found him guilty. For the first time today, we got a better picture of Brizzi's claimed rationale for closing his case without offering any witnesses or evidence in defense of his client.

Previously, Brizzi has maintained in public interviews that his strategy not to put on a defense was based on his belief that the prosecution had not met its burden in proving any of the charges against him, a tactic he says caught prosecutors off guard. Today, he told Judge Pfleging during his testimony that he had never made any firm decision until what, if any, witnesses he would call until the prosecution neared the end of its case against his client. Brizzi claimed that during a late-night meeting with White and his wife, Michelle White, that he began to question the truthfulness of the testimony that she had previously provided to the Indiana Recount Commission, where she testified that she and her husband did not reside together in the condominium he purchased a few months before their marriage until the couple tied the knot Memorial Day weekend after the May primary. Michelle testified that White spent much of his time on the road campaigning for Secretary of State, but that he slept in the basement of his ex-wife's home until they were married. White's ex-wife, Nicole Mills, buttressed her testimony during the Recount Commission proceedings.

Brizzi acknowledged that he had represented Michelle White during the Recount Commission as her pro bono counsel when she testified in support of her husband. During a tough late-night grilling of her during the trial, Brizzi claims that in an agitated and emotional state Michelle claimed Charlie didn't really "live there, live there" in reference to Nicole's home, which Brizzi characterized as a "confession" or "recantation" of her Recount Commission testimony. At that moment, Brizzi says his trial strategy began to change. He says that he came to the conclusion that the rules of professional conduct would not have allowed him to offer testimony from Michelle that he said he believed would be untruthful. When asked why he argued to jurors in his closing argument that White resided at his ex-wife's home during the time in question if he didn't believe Michelle, he responded that it was his duty to argue his client's case as best as he could to the jury.

Ciobanu questioned Brizzi's judgment for not spending any time prepping any of the witnesses he had listed on his final witness list prior to trial and questioned whether he ever had any intention of calling witnesses. Brizzi explained that it was not necessary for him to sit down and interview all potential witnesses prior to trial. He said that he typically speaks to witnesses shortly before or at the time of the trial.

At the beginning of his testimony, special prosecutor Dan Sigler, Sr. strenuously objected to any attempts by White's attorney to impeach Brizzi's testimony with testimony he gave last week in the civil case White has filed against Brizzi for legal malpractice. Sigler complained that White's attorney circumvented a deposition of Brizzi in the post-conviction relief proceeding by filing a civil lawsuit against him and deposing him in that matter instead without notice to him. Ciobanu shot back that Sigler had been made aware of the deposition and had been afforded the opportunity to attend the deposition but chose not to attend it. Judge Pflefging overruled Sigler's objection and permitted Brizzi to be examined on matters discussed in the deposition that were relevant to whether he had provided ineffective counsel.

One by one, Brizzi dismissed the value of calling witnesses. After dismissing Michelle's testimony as untrustworthy, he said he didn't want to call White's ex-wife, Nicole, because he believed that she was too corporate-like in her answers and jurors would wonder why she testified if White's wife didn't testify. He said that White's mother was "too emotional" to be an effective witness. He had ethical concerns that an expert witness that Brizzi says was retained by White and his father without his consultation, Ryan Harmon, a former Indiana State Police sergeant, would not be credible. Harmon was prepared to offer testimony based on his analysis of GPS data gathered from White's cell phone records that he said would prove that White spent most nights at his ex-wife's home during the period in question when he wasn't traveling throughout the state.

Brizzi said that he was concerned about information Sigler had shared with him before trial about a phone conversation that he said Harmon had recorded with a State Police investigator, whom had been relied upon by the prosecution, and whom Harmon had supposedly accused of being selected to conduct White's investigation as a favor to the governor and Sigler. According to the allegation, the State Police investigator was using the prosecution to angle for a promotion within the department. Brizzi said that the concerns shared with him by Sigler raised ethical challenges in offering him as a credible witness. He said that he concluded that Harmon's testimony would not be needed after he was satisfied that he had adequately discredited the expert testimony offered by the prosecution, a Sprint employee. Ciobanu pointed out that the prosecution had not identified Sprint employee Ray Clark as an expert witness until right before trial. Brizzi admitted that the late disclosure had initially caused him concern, and that he briefly considered seeking a continuance but that after he saw the evidence that he intended to offer and based upon his prior conversations with Harmon he said that he was comfortable with the state being allowed to offer the surprise, last-minute witness to their case.

Following a recess in this morning's testimony, Judge Pfleging had an admonition to everyone involved in the case whose emotions were running high. It was not immediately clear what had prompted the call for a side bar between the prosecution, White's attorney and Brizzi's attorney during a break that prompted the admonition from the judge. One court room observer saw an exchange occur during a break in today's proceeding between Brizzi and Harmon during which the witness claims that Brizzi was overheard to say that Harmon had better watch his back. Harmon, who had been seated in the courtroom at the beginning of today's proceeding, was asked to leave due to a separation of witness order issued by the judge.

Ciobanu also questioned Brizzi about whether he had considered seeking a continuance in the case due to his mother's failing health at the time of the trial and the distraction it was causing him. Brizzi acknowledged that a health care worker at St. Vincent's where his mother was being treated had made emergency calls to him about his mother near the time of the trial, but he said he later dismissed the health care worker as being a "chicken little" because he would find his mother doing fine when he rushed to be by her side after receiving a call from her. Brizzi's mother passed away this past May.

Brizzi's most critical testimony was about White himself being called as a witness. Brizzi said that after working for months prior to trial for hundreds of hours with White he concluded that he would do more harm for his case by testifying in his defense. Calling him as a witness would have been a "disaster" Brizzi claimed, although White did previously testify in his own behalf during his Recount Commission hearing without disastrous consequences. Brizzi criticized White for being too emotional and worked up with the prosecution team, claiming that White inappropriately stared down the prosecutors when they were in the same room and showed too much of an inclination to want to get into a fight with them. Brizzi had also suggested that the amount of money being spent on the case was of concern to his client, although Ciobanu needled him about incurring the added expense of renting office space across the street from the Hamilton Co. Courthouse for a three-month period for a trial that lasted only a few days especially for White's case.

White's attorney criticized Brizzi for relying upon jury nullification as a jury strategy, a characterization challenged by Sigler, who claimed there was nothing in the record to support a jury nullification strategy. Brizzi, however, conceded that during voir dire he had asked potential jurors whether they were sympathetic to the argument that it would be unfair to prosecute someone for a technical violation of the law that few people were prosecuted for breaking. As an example, Brizzi mentioned the example of prosecuting someone for betting small wagers while playing poker, which is technically illegal gambling. Ciobanu believes that Brizzi poisoned the jury pool from the outset by suggesting to them his belief that his client had broken a law that most people are never prosecuted for breaking. Ciobanu noted that the prosecution struck potential jurors who answered sympathetically to the question posed to them by Brizzi.

Perhaps the most damning admission from Brizzi during his testimony this morning came when he admitted that he mistakenly believed that evidence to which the prosecution and defense had stipulated prior to trial would be admissible had never been formerly tendered by him as evidence for the jury to consider. That included documentary evidence White offered to prove that he resided at the home of his ex-wife for the brief period during which he had abandoned the apartment in which he had been residing following his previous divorce but before he said that he moved into the condominium he purchased for him and Michelle to reside following their marriage. White claims that he did not immediately move into the condominium with Michelle because of her young children from a prior marriage who were residing there with her. Brizzi dismissed the significance of the omission, claiming the evidence broke both ways in that some of it could have been used by the prosecution to prove he had actually resided at the condominium. Nonetheless, the same evidence had been offered at his Recount Commission, which determined that he satisfied residency for voting purposes based upon the standards set out in statute and as interpreted in prior Supreme Court decisions.

There were also lengthy discussions during Brizz's testimony about instructions made to the jury. Brizzi agreed that he had worked with Jerry Bonnet, general counsel for the Secretary of State's office, prior to trial on jury instructions. He acknowledged that the instructions given to the jury did not include instructions Ciobanu argued were critical to allowing the jury to properly apply the law to the facts. Sigler contended those were issues decided by the judge and not left up to Brizzi alone, and that those issues had been preserved for White's appeal. Ciobanu faulted Brizzi for not arguing to the jury the correct legal standard for establishing residency for voting purposes and for not moving for a directed verdict if he believed that the prosecution's evidence did not support a conviction. Brizzi defended his actions, noting that he had filed motions prior to court based on those legal arguments, which were rejected by the trial court judge. This afternoon, White's attorney offered testimony from family members, including his ex-wife and mother, who believed they were going to be called as witnesses but were never called to testify by Brizzi during the trial.

UPDATED: After reviewing the tweeting by some of the mainstream media reporters who covered today's hearing, it only confirms my view that these reporters come to a story with preconceived notions and an agenda that heavily taints their reporting on all matters concerning Charlie White. Once these people have decided they don't like you because the establishment folks to whom they suck up tell them you're an outcast and must be treated as such, they will not report anything about you accurately or fairly. This is the sad state of affairs where we find ourselves with today's journalists. There is little distinction between fact reporters and opinion commentators. These people are incapable of discerning real corruption from fabricated outrage. This is why it's possible for a President today to commit crimes far worse than President Nixon imagined committing on his darkest days in office and not cause today's reporters who are supposed to represent the top news organizations in the country to even bat an eye.

Charlie White Files Malpractice Lawsuit Against Carl Brizzi

Former Indiana Secretary of State Charlie White this week filed in the Marion Superior Court a legal malpractice lawsuit against Carl Brizzi arising out of his representation of him in the criminal case brought against him in Hamilton County where a jury found White guilty on six of seven felony charges brought against him by a special prosecutor after Brizzi declined to put on a defense case during White's trial. The case has been assigned to Judge Patrick McCarty and is the second such lawsuit to be filed against Brizzi in recent months.

In May, former Hancock Co. Coroner Tamara VanGundy, who was forced from office after she voluntarily pleaded guilty to a Class D felony offense for official misconduct arising out of a drunk driving arrest, sued Brizzi after she claimed that he told her she would be to return to her duties and run for re-election as coroner despite her guilty plea despite the existence of a state law to the contrary. VanGundy's case is pending in Marion Circuit Court Judge Louis Rosenberg's court.

White has filed a petition for post-conviction relief in Hamilton County after getting a new judge assigned to his case. Judge Steven Nation, who presided over White's trial, recused himself from the case after White filed a petition seeking his removal from the case. White's hearing for post-conviction relief has been scheduled before Judge Daniel Pfleging for August 15, 2013. White blames his conviction, in part, on Brizzi's decision not to call a number of defense witnesses who were present and prepared to be called. Among those witnesses was an expert witness who would have testified that GPS data from White's cell phone proved that he spent most nights at the home of his ex-wife where he claimed to be residing for voting purposes.

The special prosecutor convinced the jury that White committed vote fraud and other related crimes by claiming his ex-wife's home as his residence for voting purposes. The Indiana Recount Commission unanimously found in White's favor after the Indiana Democratic Party brought a post-election complaint against him following the 2010 general election where White easily defeated their party's candidate for secretary of state in 2010, Vop Osili. The Recount Commission determined that White had legally registered to vote and was eligible to hold office. The trial court which convicted White applied a different voting residency standard than has been applied in numerous voting registration disputes decided by Indiana courts, as well as the Recount Commission hearing his case.

Federal Judge Accepts Former Chief Deputy Prosecutor's Plea Deal In Bribery Case

Federal District Court Judge Sarah Evans Barker accepted a guilty plea for the former Chief Deputy Prosecutor in the Marion Co. Prosecutor's Office, David Wyser, on a single count of bribery. According to the stipulated facts in Wyser's plea deal, Wyser discussed the receipt of a $2,500 campaign contribution with the attorney for a woman convicted of hiring a man to murder her husband while discussing a modified prison sentence that would allow her to be immediately released from prison for the time she had already served. Weeks after the prisoner's father wrote the $2,500 check to Wyser's campaign committee in his race for Hamilton Co. prosecutor, Wyser signed a modified prison sentence agreement for Paula Willoughby, which was later approved by a Marion Co. superior court judge.

As part of the plea agreement, Wyser has agreed to cooperate with federal investigators in ongoing public corruption probes, which may include his ex-boss, former Marion Co. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi, who received $30,000 in campaign contributions from Willoughby's father, as well as the attorney for Willoughby, who hosted a political fundraiser for Wyser in her downtown condo and discussed receiving a campaign contribution from Willoughby's father the same day that he wrote out a check for $2,500 to Wyser's campaign committee. Jessie Willoughby, the sister of the murder victim, told the Star's Tim Evans that her family was never notified by Brizzi or Wyser concerning the proposed sentence modification of her brother's killer. They learned about it from media reports according to Evans.

Public Corruption Charges Against Brizzi Coming?

UPDATED. Fox59 News' Russ McQuaid is reporting that U.S. Attorney Joe Hogsett will announce charges against a top official of former Marion Co. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi's office in connection with the early release of convicted killer, Paula Willoughby, whose 110-year sentence was reduced to 18 years at the initiation of the prosecutor's office so she could be released from prison after her father, Harrison Epperly, made large campaign donations to Carl Brizzi.

McQuaid reports that charges will be announced against Brizzi's former chief deputy, David Wyser, at a press conference this afternoon. Rumors surfaced several weeks back that Wyser had reached a plea agreement with federal prosecutors, which presumably would lead to charges against his former boss. McQuaid's report only mentions charges against Wyser and makes no mention of a plea agreement.

The IBJ is now reporting that Wyser is expected to plead guilty to the charges U.S. Attorney Joe Hogsett will announce at a press conference this afternoon at 1:30 p.m. and cooperate with an ongoing investigation.

Wyser is expected to plead guilty and cooperate with authorities as they continue an investigation led by the FBI, sources told IBJ. Brizzi is a target but has not been charged with any crime and has denied wrongdoing.

Wyser, who was Brizzi's chief trial deputy, in 2010 ran an unsuccessful race for Hamilton County prosecutor after Brizzi opted against running for a third term in Marion County. Wyser has since served as a deputy prosecutor in Madison County.

The case against Wyser is expected to center around the early release of Paula Willoughby, who had been convicted in a murder-for-hire scheme. Her father, Harrison Epperly, made large political contributions to Brizzi and Wyser as their office was considering a potential sentence modification.

Willoughby was sentenced to 110 years in prison in 1991 after her husband was gunned down outside the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. An appeal shrank the sentence to 70 years. The modification cut it to time served, and Willoughby was freed in July 2009.

Epperly gave at least $29,000 to Brizzi from 2006 to 2008, and also donated $2,500 to Wyser. The latter came in May 2009, a month before the filing of the sentence modification in court. Both Brizzi and Wyser later returned their donations, many of which came through Epperly’s company EMSP LLC . . .

An updated Star story on this afternoon's press conference with U.S. Attorney Joe Hogsett confirms that Wyser has agreed to plead guilty to federal bribery charges in connection with accepting campaign contributions in exchange for seeking a sentence reduction for Willoughby. Wyser has agreed to cooperate with the feds in their ongoing investigation of public corruption in the Marion Co. Prosecutor's Office. "For too long people in this city have had reason to doubt their government," U.S. Attorney Joe Hogsett said at the Monday press conference. "Justice is not for sale." The 53-year old Wyser could face a prison sentence of up to 10 years for the single felony count to which he pleaded guilty, along with a fine of up to $250,000. Wyser will also face a suspension of his license to practice law, if not outright disbarment.

And on a lower note, the pretend journalist tweets:

Abdul-Hakim Shabazz ‏@AttyAbdul 1h

We told you a month ago, Wyser was looking to cut a deal with the Feds. The cheat sheet 04 10-2012 on @slideshare

Anyone else notice that all his drinking buddies seem to become the target of federal public corruption investigations? Maybe certain people should learn to be a little more careful about the company they keep.

Here are five take-away questions from today's announcement:

1.  Wyser worked under Marion Co. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi as his chief trial deputy. Could Wyser have made a decision to file a motion to request a sentence reduction for Paula Willoughby without Brizzi's consent? Because Willoughby's father made at least $29,000 in campaign contributions to Brizzi after Wyser agreed to seek the sentence reduction in exchange for a much smaller campaign contribution for his Hamilton Co. Prosecutor's race, it seems unlikely Brizzi was not a party to the agreement.

2.  Willoughby was represented by Jennifer Lukemeyer, a prominent criminal defense attorney with the law firm of Voyles Zahn & Paul. Could her client's father have reached an agreement with Wyser without involving Lukemeyer in the transaction? According to news reports, Lukemeyer hosted a fundraiser for Wyser's unsuccessful campaign for Hamilton Co. Prosecutor.

NOTE: Paragraph 7 of the indictment against Wyser states that "On or about May 29, 2009, David Wyser discussed receiving a campaign contribution from the father of the prisoner with the prisoner's attorney."

3.  If Wyser admits that he was bribed based on today's announcement, why hasn't the person who paid the bribe to Wyser been charged yet?

4.  Because the motion filed by the prosecutor's office in this case seeking a sentence reduction for the most serious crime one can commit was so highly unusual and required the approval of a judge, was the judge who signed off on the sentence reduction a party to any agreement reached by Wyser, Willoughby and/or her attorney?

5.  Will today's announcement and the follow out going forward impact the petition for post-conviction relief filed by former Indiana Secretary of State Charlie White? In White's petition, he argues that he received ineffective counsel from Brizzi during his Hamilton County trial during which he was found guilty of six felony charges arising out of the claim that he was illegally registered to vote at the time he sought the nomination for Secretary of State. White argues, in part, that Brizzi was distracted at the time of his trial because of a federal investigation that had been launched against Brizzi. White was also previously represented by Lukemeyer's law partner, Dennis Zahn, who White fired after he advised him to accept a plea deal with the special prosecutor that would force him to give up his office.

One last item of note I found on WTHR's website tonight:

Wyser appeared to be at his home in Geist Monday night, but did not answer the door. The home is for sale for $1.3 million.

Umm, how does a person afford a $1.3 million home on a deputy prosecutor's salary?

Brizzi Suffers Mild Heart Attack

Former Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi suffered a mild heart attack over the weekend according to WRTV. Jack Rinehart is reporting that Brizzi was taken to St. Vincent Hospital on Saturday after suffering shortness of breath.

Former Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi is hospitalized after suffering what he called a mild heart attack.

Brizzi, who represented former Secretary of State Charlie White in his voter fraud trial, is at St. Vincent Hospital.

Brizzi told RTV6's Jack Rinehart that he felt shortness of breath on Saturday.

The former prosecutor said the heart attack was stress-related and that doctors found no blockages.

Brizzi said he had also been short of breath while carrying boxes during the White trial.

Brizzi was being kept for observation on Monday and said he expects to be released from the hospital on Tuesday.

Here's wishing a speedy recovery for Brizzi. A sentencing hearing for his client, Charlie White, is scheduled for February 23. Brizzi has indicated that his client intends to appeal his six felony convictions as he most certainly should do because the trial court judge permitted charges to a go to a jury that he should have been dismissed as a matter of law. White's prosecution in Hamilton County is a black eye on the criminal justice system in Indiana. In North Carolina, prosecutors who conduct cases like the prosecutors in White's case lose their jobs and their license to practice law. In Hamilton County, they get patted on the back for a job well done. 

And Then There Was One

Former Marion Co. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi did the right thing and reached an agreement with the bankruptcy trustee for Fair Finance Company to repay $195,881, the lion's share of the money Brizzi's campaign committee received in donations from indicted Ponzi scheme operator Tim Durham. That leaves Gov. Mitch Daniels as the only politician who received significant campaign contributions from Durham who has not repaid monies to the bankruptcy trustee. Daniels and Brizzi were the largest recipients of campaign contributions from Durham with each receiving in excess of $200,000. Brizzi wrote a check for $170,811 from his campaign committee and wrote a check out of his personal pocket for $15,000. Brizzi has agreed the repay the remaining $10,000 balance in monthly installments of $1,000. The funds paid out of his personal pocket are funds the trustee alleges Brizzi received in personal financial assistance from Durham, an amount disputed by Brizzi according to the IBJ's Greg Andrews:

In addition, court papers show that bankruptcy Trustee Brian Bash alleged that Fair Finance and Durham provided Brizzi with personal loans and financial assistance totaling $55,735 for trips and miscellaneous expenses.

Brizzi disputes the amount, according to the settlement, but agreed to pay $25,000. Though the deal requires court approval, Brizzi’s campaign committee already has provided the trustee with a $170,881 check, and Brizzi has provided a $15,000 check. He’ll pay the remaining $10,000 in monthly installments of $1,000, the settlement says.

Gov. Daniels should do the right thing and pay his share to the bankruptcy trustee. Daniels maintains that all of the funds Durham contributed to him have been spent, although he has continued to raise large sums of money for his political action committee after the close of his last gubernatorial campaign. Daniels is also the most wealthy of the politicians receiving money from Durham. He has a personal fortune estimated at being worth more than $50 million.

OmniSource Buys Its Way Out Of Criminal Case

[UPDATED] If you're a multi-million dollar company represented by a politically-connected law firm, you can buy your way out of any serious criminal charge in Marion County. That's the message Marion Co. Prosecutor Terry Curry is sending out tonight in a deal he has reached with OmniSource, a company that employed more than 50 off-duty police officers and was indicted by a grand jury for conspiring to buy millions of dollars worth of stolen scrap metal. Under a deal struck with the giant scrap metal dealer, the company will pay $1 million $300,000 into an education unspecified fund and will [not] be allowed to once again employ your public safety officers at its scrap yards doing security work. Fox 59 News' Russ McQuaid had these details about this deal that stinks to high heaven, which have apparently been revised substantially after the details were first aired earlier today:

The case against a chain of OmniSource scrap yards has been resolved with no criminal charges. A seven-figure settlement hasalso been reached.

OmniSource buys scrap metal at six locations around Indianapolis.

In 2009, then Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi claimed OmniSource knew it was buying stolen goods and that off duty police officers helped. 

When he was prosecutor, Brizzi claimed OmniSource was knowingly involved in a criminal enterprise and guilty of buying millions of dollars of stolen metal throughout Indiana every year. A Marion County grand jury agreed, indicting the company on three counts of corrupt business influence and five counts of attempted receipt of stolen property.

A total of 51 metro police officers who worked part-time at OmniSource had their work permits pulled and were looking at possible criminal charges.

Now, a source indicates the cops will be cleared and OmniSource will establish a $1 million fund for education and a study and will be able to rehire and retrain the officers.

OmniSource claimed its prosecution was all about generating headlines and fueled by a possible money grab by Brizzi and his office. The Prosecutor’s Office would have received millions of dollars in forfeiture funds if the scrap metal dealer was shut down.

Brizzi's successor, Marion County Prosecutor Terry Curry is expected to announce the deal tomorrow.

The audacity of this corrupt deal is beyond anything Carl Brizzi was accused of doing during his eight years as Marion Co. Prosecutor. Let's remind folks of what went on here. The largest scrap metal dealer in the state goes out and hires more than 50 off-duty police officers to provide security work for its scrap yards. A commanding district officer provides preferential treatment to the scheduling of police officers who work for OmniSource, in effect putting the scrap metal dealers' time and use of our police officers ahead of their policing work for the public they are sworn to serve. Just by coincidence, one of the off-duty police officers working for OmniSource was heading up undercover investigations targeting competitors of OmniSource. Several of those small-time scrap metal dealers were busted, prosecuted and jailed for knowingly purchasing stolen metal products and put out of business. At the same time, a task force of federal, state and local law enforcement officers uncovers large volumes of stolen scrap metal purchased at OmniSource's scrap yards while there were off-duty police officers working at their facilities.

After a lengthy grand jury investigation, the company is indicted on multiple charges related to the purchase of millions of dollars worth of stolen scrap metal. The company's lawyer, Larry Mackey of Barnes & Thornburg, who once served as campaign chairman for former Marion Co. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi, whose office brought the charges, attacked Brizzi for bringing the charges. OmniSource then filed a lawsuit against Brizzi seeking the return of assets of $277,000 seized during raids conducted on the company's scrap yards. OmniSource's lawyer accused Brizzi of bringing the charges against the company to grab headlines and as a money grab.

During the course of the investigation, Mackey tried to use his clout to get the lead investigator on the case fired, if not demoted for revealing facts of the case to the media. In particular, Mackey was pissed off at a report that appeared in Platts Steel Market Daily.  IMPD Maj. Chris Boomershine told industry newspaper Platts Steel Markets Daily in February 2009 that OmniSource kept documents on how to avoid antitrust violations, hired off-duty IMPD officers to target competitors and bought cars altered to appear stolen from undercover police officers. Here's some of my earlier reporting on the details of what that investigation learned:

Four days before IMPD executed search warrants on OmniSource's scrap yards in Indianapolis in February, 2009, investigators learned that an OmniSource scrap yard in Marion County purchased 45,204 pounds of stolen lead ingots valued at $40,000. The lead has been purchased by Johnson Company, an Indianapolis-based company, from Gopher Resources, a Michigan company. The lead was supposed to be transported by Freight Master. Investigators learned that a Freight Master supervisor had noticed that the shipment was still on their lot and was long over due to be delivered to Johnson Company. The Freight Master driver, who apparently believed the shipment was so long over due that no one would miss it, took the load of lead to one of the OmniSource locations to sell it. At the OmniSource location in question, the driver presented a shipping receipt clearly stating that the shipment was purchased from Gopher and was to be delivered to Johnson. Because the driver was using a Freight Master truck, OmniSource cut a check for $8,100 for the $40,000 shipment to Freight Master.

What investigators say happened next is extraordinary. The Freight Master driver allegedly told the OmniSource employee to make the check out to him personally. Shockingly, the OmniSource employee is alleged to have done just that. By the time investigators served search warrants on all OmniSource locations in Indianapolis four days later for receiving stolen property, the stolen lead shipment had been moved to OmniSource's Ft. Wayne facility. The day after police served search warrants on OmniSource, all of the information, including pictures and copies of the shipping receipt and check written directly to the driver, was forwarded through the company's chain of command to the company's vice president in Ft. Wayne. Despite being made aware by this point of the stolen lead purchase, the vice president failed to notify police of the purchase or file a police report concerning the stolen lead. Instead, the vice president sent all of the information back down the chain of command to the company's head of security with a cryptic note, “FYI”.

The head of OmniSource's security also failed to make a police report. Instead, the security chief for the company allegedly told Johnson Company personnel that he could not make a police report because OmniSource was not "a victim." Unbelievably, the head of OmniSource's security allegedly told Johnson Company personnel that the company could not get back their shipment until OmniSource had been paid the $8,100 it had paid for the obviously stolen property. Later, as pressure on OmniSource picked up, the company reportedly allowed Johnson Company to pick up the lead shipment order without paying the $8,100. OmniSource reportedly fired the employee who purchased the stolen lead; however, a source close to the investigation says investigators believe OmniSource has a history of moving employees who commit these types of violations to another location instead of firing them. Bear in mind that all of these activities occurred undetected while your police officers were working within the company's scrap yards.

After all of this, the company and the police officers are actually being rewarded for their actions under the deal Curry has brokered. The criminal charges go away, and a new education fund is set up to be used to train police officers to work off duty once again at its scrap yards. You should come away from this entire ordeal with the absolute worst opinion of our criminal justice system. There are clearly two criminal justice systems in this country: one for the common folks and a special system for the wealthy and politically-connected. So much for Curry's pledge to restore public confidence in the prosecutor's office.

UPDATE: Fox 59 News pulled McQuaid's story on the deal reached with OmniSource just minutes ago after he first reported it during the 4:00 p.m. news broadcast. Apparently, OmniSource will pay $300,000, but it will get back the $277,000 in assets seized during the raids that the prosecutor's office sought to claim through a forfeiture action. McQuaid now says the company will not be allowed to re-employ off-duty IMPD officers. WRTV's Rafael Sanchez also reported on a deal being reached to drop the charges. His story says:

The Marion County Prosecutor's Office is expected to announce Wednesday morning it will drop criminal charges against the city's largest metal recycler, OmniSource.

The company has been at the center of controversy for the last two years after it was accused of profiting from the collection of stolen scrap metal, 6News' Rafael Sanchez reported.

In October 2010, then-Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi filed eight felony charges against OmniSource, including corrupt business influence and attempted receipt of stolen property.

6News has learned that some officials believe that there may not be enough evidence to pursue the case.

The office of the county's newly elected Prosecutor Terry Curry told 6News "it can't confirm or deny" the story.

An attorney for OmniSource would not comment on the story, saying "MCPO (Marion County Prosecutor's Office) will determine what is public when."

Indicted Drug Dealer Tied To Perry Township Constable Controversy

Fox59 News' Russ McQuaid has discovered a link between a former police officer indicted on cocaine dealing charges last week along with a controversial town marshal of Brooklyn, Indiana, Terry Carlyle, to the badge-selling controversy involving the former Perry Township Constable Roy Houchins. According to McQuaid, John Smith testified before a federal grand jury about how he was able to purchase a constable's badge from Houchins for $1,000.

One of the two former police officers indicted by federal authorities last week once testified before a federal grand jury about a badge-selling scheme operated out of the Perry Township Constable's Office.


In November of 2007 John Smith told Fox59 News that he paid Constable Roy Houchins $1000 to join the constable’s office and receive a badge and policing powers. Houchins denied the payoff ever took place . . .

Smith later testified before a federal grand jury investigating the badge-selling operation. Now he’s in jail, awaiting a hearing in federal court in Hammond Tuesday . . .


Smith told Fox 59 in May of 2008 that the night before he testified in front of the grand jury his Mercedes Benz was vandalized in his eastside tow yard. That case was never solved, and neither was an arson that caused $50,000 damage to Smith’s property some months before.

You may recall that Houchins dropped dead outside a southside bar just days before he was scheduled to go on trial for federal corruption charges in connection with the badge-selling scheme. Police say Houchins appeared to have suffered a blow to his head when he supposedly fell after leaving the bar because he wasn't feeling well. An autopsy failed to determine his cause of death. A deputy in his office, Michael Sherfick, pleaded guilty to charges of accepting $30,000 in bribes for handing out deputy constable badges. Another deputy constable in the office who also worked for former Marion Co. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi, Dan Constantino, was later charged by a special prosecutor with corrupt business influence, forgery and official misconduct. Constantino was accused of using his police powers to sign off on law enforcement vehicle inspection forms for three stolen vehicles. Constantino, according to McQuaid, was suspected of playing a role in removing guns that had been seized by IMPD in domestic disputes from the property control room on behalf of the constable's office.

As for the latest federal charges against Smith and Carlyle, McQuaid reports they "are accused of attempting to deal and possess at least five kilograms of cocaine and carrying weapons while doing it." "Smith is also accused of transferring a firearm that would be used in the drug deal," McQuaid said. What is particularly interesting is McQuaid's report that Smith's property had been raided by IMPD just weeks before Houchins dropped dead. "In February of 2010, IMPD and Marion County Grand Jury investigators raided Smith’s garage at JDS Towing and Smith’s home," McQuaid reported. "They reportedly seized business records and drugs." Curiously, those charges were dropped before the federal investigation of Smith and Carlyle was launched according to McQuaid. "Smith also was owner of Elite Services, a security firm," McQuaid said. "He served on various central Indiana police departments and has been investigated for impersonating a police officer in the past."

Brizzi Still Thumbing His Nose At Fair Finance Trustee; Finance Trustee Will Sue Those Who Don't Return Contributions

The patience of the federal bankruptcy trustee for Fair Finance is running out on Indiana politicians who continue to thumb their noses at his demands they return campaign contributions indicted Ponzi scheme operator Tim Durham lavished on them from the more than $200 million he defrauded out of Ohio investors. Indiana's top law enforcement official, Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller, and the former most powerful prosecutor in the state, Carl Brizzi, are among the politicians who have so far rebuffed the trustee's efforts to recoup the money from them. The trustee plans to file suit against Brizzi for $192,000 his campaign committee received. According to his latest campaign finance reports, his committee still holds more than $200,000. WRTV contacted Brizzi and this is the flippant response they received from him:

"This is the biggest bunch of revisionist history I've ever seen. There was no indication that or hint that the money came from an inappropriate source," he said. "It was spent in good faith. I have identified a couple thousand dollars that could be connected to donations from Fair Finance."

It's unbelievable that WIBC-FM continues to allow this man to host his Crime Beat radio show and WISH-TV has him under contract as a legal expert when he demonstrated during his eight years as county prosecutor and to this day just how little regard for the law he has. Zoeller apparently won't return the $22,000 he pocketed from Durham until he is assured the money will go to the investors knowing full well that the trustee's expenses, which are very high in a complicated case like this one, must first be paid before any money can be distributed to the investors according to WRTV's Rafael Sanchez. He details sums the trustee laid out in letters to other committees demanding repayment:

The letters ask for repayment of donations made since February 2006, four years before the company was forced into bankruptcy because of angry investors. The trustee’s office said it is using the principle of "fraudulent transfer" to collect the money it contends Durham owed to Fair Finance.


Specifically, the Greater Indianapolis Republican Finance Committee was asked to repay $52,943. The trustee wants $5,000 from the Marion County Republican Central Committee, $92,500 from the Indiana Republican State Committee, $58,580 from the House Republican Campaign Committee, $22,000 from Zoeller for Attorney General and $10,000 from the Committee to Elect Brian Bosma.

The trustee’s office said it sent each group a letter on June 10, 2010, but never heard back from the above-named organizations, and that this week’s letter is a last-chance warning to discuss repayment before legal action.

GIRFCO and Brizzi are especially vulnerable given the direct role Durham played in their campaign committees in his role as finance chairman for the respective committees. Brizzi was closer to Durham than any of the politicians who received money from him. He often traveled and partied with him. Sen. Mike Delph is the only politician who has returned contributions to the trustee to date, and he did so without being prompted by a letter from the trustee. Former Marion Co. Sheriff candidate Tim Motsinger also returned approximately $200,000 his campaign committee indicated Durham had loaned to his committee at the same time he ended his campaign.

Fair Finance Trustee's Statement On Durham Campaign Contributions

The bankruptcy trustee for Fair Finance Company issued a statement in response to numerous press inquiries following Sen. Mike Delph's decision to return $10,000 his campaign committee received in donations from indicted Ponzi scheme operator Tim Durham. It's important to note Sen. Delph returned his contributions voluntarily to the bankruptcy trustee before Durham was indicted and without being asked to do so by the Trustee. Trustee Brian Bash indicated in his statement he would not hesitate to take other action to recover the contributions if the other campaign committees did not voluntarily return their contributions.

Sen. Delph has done the right thing. He came forward and returned the funds without being asked, and before Durham was indicted.

Months ago, the Trustee sent letters to many other politicians explaining the circumstances and asking them to return the contributions they received from Durham. The campaigns that received the largest amounts include Gov. Mitch Daniels, Carl Brizzi, Paul Rickets, the Indiana Republican State Committee and the Greater Indianapolis Republican Finance Committee. Governor Daniels responded, and we hope for mutual resolution through continued discussions. Most others did not respond.

We were also disappointed by media reports that some campaigns state they will not return the contributions because they were already spent. Such a glib response is not a defense, and it trivializes the losses suffered by the victims. If money were stolen from the people who made those statements, we wonder if they would be satisfied with that explanation. We understand that campaigns did not plan to have to return these contributions, but the victims also did not plan to be cheated.

We hope that those who received campaign contributions from or through Durham will contact us and arrange to return those funds for the benefit of the victims. The Trustee would much rather resolve these issues amicably, but will not hesitate to pursue other action if necessary.

It seems particularly outrageous that Attorney General Greg Zoeller and former Marion Co. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi as law enforcement officers would show any reluctance to return the contributions, particularly since their campaign committees have sufficient balances to return the contributions to the Trustee. Brizzi and Daniels each received more than $200,000 from Durham, while Zoeller received at least $21,000. As I've also indicated before, Gov. Mitch Daniels will likely face many questions from the battleground state of Ohio, if not elsewhere, should he decide to enter the 2012 Republican presidential race.

Attorney General Greg Zoeller Might Return His Dirty Durham Money

It doesn't look like our state's Attorney General Greg Zoeller wants to be too virtuous when it comes to dealing with the dirty money he collected from indicted Ponzi scheme operator Tim Durham. The Indiana Legislative Insight's Ed Feigenbaum reports that Zoeller says he might return the campaign contributions he collected from Durham "once he sorts out just who would get the leftover lucre", whatever that means. Sen. Mike Delph is the only Republican to return campaign contributions he received from Durham to the bankruptcy trustee for Fair Finance Co. tasked with marshaling as much of the more than $200 million out of which Durham defrauded investors in Ohio. Delph told the AP "he is troubled and embarrassed at the attitude of Republicans who aren't returning Durham's donations." Feigbenbaum notes that Former Marion Co. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi said of the  more than $200,000 in campaign contributions he received from Durham during the same airing of his Crime Beat radio show on WIBC-FM last weekend where he berated a whistle blower in the case as a "crazy stalker" and "residual nutcase" that the money should be viewed no differently than a contribution Durham made to a local charity. Just listen to yourself, Carl. So bad.

Will The Crime Beat Go On?



Carl Brizzi

Word on the street is that the days may be numbered for Carl Brizzi's Crime Beat show on WIBC-FM. A little birdy says Emmis Communications executives were none too pleased with Brizzi's on-air tirade during last Saturday's show against the whistle blower who blew the lid off Brizzi pal Tim Durham's Ponzi scheme, leading federal agents to descend on him and bring his high-flying world to a crash landing. Needless to say, the whistle blower feels Brizzi stepped way over the line when he called her out by name and suggested she was a "crazy stalker" and "residual nutcase." News executives at WISH-TV, which has also retained the services of Brizzi as a legal commentator after he stepped down as Marion Co. Prosecutor at the end of last year, were reportedly upset when Brizzi refused to take time out of a Las Vegas trip to comment on Durham's indictment last week after a satellite feed had already been set up for the interview. La de da de de.

Brizzi Comes Unhinged During Weekend Radio Show

Carl Brizzi

Most live radio talk shows employ a delay that allows the station to filter the broadcast for inappropriate material, normally coming from callers, but in rare instances, from the show's host. Somebody failed badly to do that during the live broadcast this afternoon of Carl Brizzi's weekend radio show on WIBC-FM, Crime Beat. Brizzi could have anticipated he might get calls inquiring about his relationship with indicted Ponzi scheme operator Tim Durham given his close friendship with him. An unidentified female caller hit Brizzi with direct questioning of his financial ties to Durham implying that he too may have engaged in some white collar criminal activiity with his best pal. Rather than cutting the caller's question short before airing her damning statements, Brizzi let her level very pointed charges against him before unleashing on her. He called her out by name repeatedly. Brizzi then called the woman "crazy," a "stalker" and "residual nutcase" against whom he said he would get a restraining order if she lived in Marion County because he "feared for his safety."

Brizzi accused the caller of rummaging through his divorce and business records after she questioned him about the timing of a mortgage recording an interest in real estate in Elkhart that he and his business partner, Paul Page, purchased and redeveloped after getting a lucrative long-term lease agreement with the Indiana Department of Child Services. The lease agreement was negotiated by a Brizzi political pal, John Bales, on behalf of the state. Bales' Venture Real Estate also handled the leasing of costly office space for the Marion Co. Prosecutor's Office downtown, which Brizzi maintains was entered into by his predecessor, Scott Newman. The caller further suggested Brizzi traded in significant sums of Cellstar stock as part of an investment group headed up by Durham without being identified as a part of the investment group as required by SEC disclosure regulations. News reports have suggested FBI officials have been investigating Brizzi's business dealings while serving as Marion Co. Prosecutor.

Another caller hit Brizzi for his acquisition of an interest in a liquor license held by Harry & Izzy's in violation of an Indiana law that prohibits law enforcement officials from owning an interest in liquor licenses. Brizzi got around the law while he was Marion Co. Prosecutor by getting his friends in the state Attorney General's office to write an advisory opinion suggesting he could own an interest in a liquor license so long as his interest was owned indirectly as a shareholder in a corporation. Brizzi insisted to the caller that Indiana law permits law enforcement officers to own an interest in alcohol permits without mentioning the slight of hand he engaged in to circumvent the law's restriction. The indirect ownership exception recognized in the AG opinion has the effect of consuming the rule prohibiting law enforcement officials from owning an interest in a liquor license.

Brizzi refused one caller's request to comment on the charges against his friend Durham. Because of his former role as Marion Co. Prosecutor, Brizzi said anything he would say ran the risk of doing real harm. Brizzi did say Durham had never been investigated for any crimes in Marion Co. during his eight years as county prosecutor, which should come as no surprise given the nearly $1 million Durham had spread around to area politicians, including Brizzi, who received over $200,000 in campaign contributions from the indicted Ponzi scheme operator. Despite having ample left-over funds in his campaign account to return the ill-gotten money to the bankruptcy trustee for Fair Finance Co., a company upon whose board Brizzi briefly served, for the benefit of investors defrauded of more than $200 million of their hard-earned savings, Brizzi has so far refused to return the money as have Gov. Mitch Daniels, House Speaker Brian Bosma and other politicians who accepted contributions from him.

More Troubling Brizzi Ties?

Marion Co. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi listed on a financial disclosure statement that he filed last year during his aborted run for Indiana's Fifth congressional district seat property he owned at 6621 Reserve Drive in Indianapolis. A search of the Marion County Assessor's assessment database identifies the property among several owned by Brizzi in Marion County; however, a closer examination of those records reveals that powerful State House lobbyist James Purucker is listed as the current owner of the property. The property had a 2009 gross assessed value of $166,200, which is down $11,000 from its 2008 gross assessed value. Brizzi estimated the value of the asset on his federal disclosure between $50,001 and $100,000. He disclosed a mortgage with the National Bank of Indianapolis on the property between $100,001 and $250,000.

Purucker lobbies for Centaur and the Indiana Spirits and Wine Wholesalers among other clients. He was a focus of media attention during investigations of the lobbying activities of the gaming industry during the 1990s. Former Marion Co. Prosecutor Scott Newman indicted the chairman of the House Ways & Means Committee, former Rep. Sam Turpin (R-Brownsburg), on bribery charges. An Indianapolis Star investigation uncovered the fact that Turpin had moved into Purucker's home after Turpin's wife filed for divorce. According to news reports, Newman executed a search warrant on Purucker during that investigation and seized his computers. One of Brizzi's business partners in Harry & Izzy's, Craig Huse, owns an interest in Centaur, the gaming company that owns the Anderson race track and racino and is one of Purucker's lobbying clients. Similarly, Brizzi moved in with alleged Ponzi scheme operator Tim Durham briefly during his divorce last year. Purucker has also donated thousands of dollars to Brizzi's campaign committee.

Previously, questions have been raised on this blog and elsewhere in the Indianapolis media about Brizzi's stock ownerships, which seem to mirror the investments made by Durham and involve companies that are the subject of securities law violations. Brizzi has also made extensive real estate investments with political insider and real estate developer John Bales that have raised eyebrows. It is difficult to believe that Brizzi could have afforded so many stock and real estate investments on his $125,000 a year prosecutor's salary.

Brizzi has yet to declare his intentions concerning re-election, notwithstanding the fact that the deadline for filing for the Republican slating convention next month is January 14. The Star's Jon Murray has more on the speculation surrounding Brizzi in a story in today's edition. Marion Co. GOP Chairman Tom John tells Murray that the GOP will have "a strong candidate" regardless of whether Brizzi runs for re-election. Not surprisingly, Marion Co. Democratic Chairman Ed Treacy says his party would welcome a Brizzi re-election bid.

Brizzi Wants To Be Donald Trump Too

He's supposed to be the full-time prosecutor of our state's largest county. In recent weeks, we've learned about Marion Co. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi's penchant for following the stock investments of alleged Ponzi scheme perpetrator, Tim Durham, his largest campaign contributor, ala Martha Stewart. Now it emerges that Brizzi has been busy trying to become the next Donald Trump in the world of real estate investment with another political insider, John Bales.

Advance Indiana first made a financial connection between Brizzi and real estate developer John Bales more than a year ago when I disclosed Brizzi's participation in a proposed $30 million real estate venture headed by Bales that intended to buy up distressed properties in Florida's one booming real estate market. At that time, controversy erupted over the Ballard administration's decision to award a no-bid contract to Bales to help dispose of "surplus" park lands. Last week, Advance Indiana exclusively reported on Brizzi's investment in another Bales real estate venture, Curtailing Investments, LLC. Borrowing heavily on my original reporting (without attribution, of course), the IBJ's Cory Schouten uncovers more real estate investments by Brizzi since he became prosecutor seven years ago, mostly involving deals with Bales. One of Bales' companies initiated a deal that landed a lease for the office building where the prosecutor's office leases 72,000 square feet.

Brizzi first made news with his investments while in office two years ago when he emerged as one of five investors in Harry & Izzy's, a new restaurant chain launched by the owners of St. Elmos steakhouse, along with the Colts' superstar quarterback, Peyton Manning. Although Brizzi is barred under Indiana law from holding an interest in a liquor license because he is a law enforcement officer, he got around the bar on his 10% ownership stake in Harry & Izzy's that was raised by the state's ATC by getting an opinion letter from his friends in the state's Attorney General's office that carved out an exception for him.

While the Harry & Izzy's story garnered public attention, Brizzi's other real estate investments have largely gone unnoticed until now. According to Schouten's story today in the IBJ, Brizzi invested in the development of a Key Bank branch in Broad Ripple in 2005 as part of his investment in Curtaiing Investments, and he took an ownership interest in an office building in Elkhart, Indiana, which recently received a lucrative state contract to lease most of the space in that building for the state's Department of Children Services. Brizzi also considered buying an interest in property that is home to the Cafe Patachou restaurant at 49th Street and Penn earlier this year. Neither Brizzi nor Bales would return calls from the IBJ seeking comment from them on their real estate investments.

Schouten's story raises questions about whether Bales and Brizzi received a sweetheart deal from the state on the lease of the Elkhart property. Brizzi disclosed on his federal disclosure statement he filed earlier this year when he briefly considered a bid for U.S. Rep. Dan Burton's fifth district seat an interest in L & BAB LLC, owner of the Elkhart real estate, that’s worth $50,000 to $100,000. "One such building is at 1659 Mishawaka St. in Elkhart, where the Department of Child Services agreed in July 2008 to lease 13,000 square feet for $19.12 per square foot, or $248,500, per year," Schouten writes. "It’s one of the highest per-square-foot rates for a state agency, and well above the $6-$10 range for available Elkhart office space listed on LoopNet," he continues. "Other state agencies pay less for space in downtown Indianapolis." Unbelievable. We're paying more to rent real estate space in economically-depressed Elkhart than we are in downtown Indianapolis?

Brizzi also borrowed $325,000 in 2004 to invest in a couple of condominiums at a Broad Ripple condo project known as The Reserve. That project was developed by Bales, Steve Pittman and Barnes & Thornburg's Ben Pecar. Pecar, incidentally, was involved in that Florida real estate venture with Bales and Brizzi as well. It looks like Brizzi was able to flip both of those condos for a quick profit. He made $24,000 on one of the units he sold in 2006 according to Schouten. Brizzi owns a stake in two other companies, Vergina, LLC and CJB Management, LLC, according to Schouten, although I believe they may be one and the same, the latter being the name to which he changed the former, which appears to carry a sexual connotation.

So the question becomes: How can Carl Brizzi afford all of these investments on his $125,000 a year salary as a prosecutor, not to mention his stock portfolio? According to his divorce documents, he and his ex-wife owned three homes together, each with first and second mortgages. Brizzi is paying $1,000 a month in child support to his ex-wife for the couple's four children. Ironically, an ethics expert tells Schouten that it does not appear that any of Brizzi's investments violated the City of Indianapolis' ethics ordinances. Actually, Brizzi is considered a state officer. That is why he files a financial disclosure statement with the State of Indiana and not the City of Indianapolis. A tough federal prosecutor would likely find plenty of legal wrong with what has been publicly disclosed to date about Brizzi's investments. If this were Chicago instead of Indianapolis, U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald would have already convened a grand jury and began issuing subpoenas to investigate Brizzi. But we have interim U.S. Attorney Tim Morrison, the guy who inexplicably unfroze Durham's assets days after filing a forfeiture action in the U.S. district court in Indianapolis.

I'd rather not sit around and wait so see what happens to Brizzi. I will once again renew my call as an elected Republican precinct committeeman for Brizzi to resign his office immediately so we can appoint someone to clean up his tarnished office, and to run for election to his office next year.

Even More Trouble For Brizzi

The IBJ and Indianapolis Star both have new reports this weekend on another Durham company in which Marion Co. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi owned stock. The company in question is Red Rock Pictures Holdings, a production company in which Durham and other associates acquired an interest in recent years and which later loaned millions to National Lampoon, Inc., another Durham-controlled company. The stock ownership was revealed on a federal financial disclosure form Brizzi filed earlier this year when he formed a campaign committee for a potential bid for the congressional seat currently held by U.S. Rep. Dan Burton (R). Brizzi did not respond to questions from the Star's Ted Evanoff and John Russell:

It is not known whether Brizzi currently holds shares in Red Rock. If he does, the disclosure would contradict a statement he made earlier this week, when he said he had no further financial ties to Durham, beyond those already reported in news stories.

Brizzi, who did not respond to several requests for comment Friday, has acknowledged he was appointed to the board of a Durham company recently raided by the FBI and bought stock in another Durham-related business whose records have been subpoenaed by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Brizzi disclosed the Red Rock investment in a campaign filing when he was considering running for Congress in the district represented by Rep. Dan Burton. Brizzi pulled out of the race after Burton said he planned to run for a 15th term.

On the disclosure form, Brizzi listed the value of his stock in Red Rock at $1 to $1,000. Shares in Red Rock are nearly worthless, trading for less than a penny each. It was not clear when Brizzi bought the stock, how much he paid or how many shares he still holds.

Also unclear is how Brizzi came to buy stock in the little-known company. No analysts follow the stock or offer recommendations on it. The company has been struggling to make ends meet.

In the quarter that ended in May, the company lost $4.2 million and disclosed it has experienced losses from operations since its inception in 2004 that raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.

The stock ownership in Red Rock becomes more troubling when you discover that Dan Laikin of National Lampoon, who recently pleaded guilty to federal charges that he manipulated National Lampoon's stock while serving as its CEO, is in the mix. Durham took the helm of National Lampoon after Laikin stepped down. The Star notes that Red Rock loaned at least $1 million to Laikin. National Lampoon bought a 14% stake in Red Rock and shared a chief financial officer, Lorraine Evanoff, for awhile. Evanoff stepped down after Laikin was charged with stock manipulation. Red Rock is currently run by television marketer Reno Rolle.

In previous interviews, Brizzi has claimed to reporters that Fair Finance and his stock ownership in CLST Holdings, another Durham-controlled company under investigation by the SEC, are the only business ties he had to Durham. Brizzi later hedged his answer in an interview with WTHR's Chris Proffitt when asked if Durham had personally loaned money to him. The new discovery of his stock in Red Rock further complicates his Durham problem. A pattern of Brizzi investments following Durham's is emerging. There have been Internet-posted rumors in the past that Red Rock was a "pump and dump" target by some investors. That's a form of stock fraud where stock investors buy a company's stock artificially cheap, generate excitement to pump its price and then dump it for a quick profit. Gee, didn't that happen with Brightpoint's stock a few years back?

The IBJ's Greg Andrews notes the growing problem Brizzi's ties to Durham are causing him. Andrews first broke the news that Brizzi had agreed to serve on Fair Finance's board of directors but thought better of that decision after Andrews began his news reporting of the company. Brizzi declined an interview for Andrews' story, but he did respond to questions by e-mail. In that correspondence, Brizzi told Andrews he thought he had sold the Red Rock stock that he had listed on his federal financial disclosure statement:

Brizzi declined IBJ’s requests for an interview about his investments. In an e-mail exchange, he initially said he did not think he owned stock in Red Rock. When presented with the disclosure, he said he thought he had sold it since the filing.

It’s not clear what led Brizzi to either Red Rock or CLST. In a letter to supporters he posted on his Facebook page Dec. 7, Brizzi said he began buying CLST in 2005 “after discussing the investment, as well as other companies, with friends and financial advisers as part of my overall investment planning.”

In that letter, Brizzi said, “To the best of my knowledge, there are no other businesses, stocks, or investments in which Durham and I both have an interest.” He stood by that statement after being presented with the Red Rock disclosure but didn’t respond to further inquiries.

The number of shares Brizzi owned in Red Rock wasn’t clear. Stock in the struggling business trades for less than a penny, leaving even large holdings nearly worthless. The filing listed the value of his stake at between zero and $1,000.

Andrews also picks up on the pattern of Brizzi buying stock in companies that Durham has become a major investor:

Details of Brizzi’s CLST investment also are sketchy. His purchases began the same year a Durham-led investment group began scarfing up shares of the firm. SEC filings don’t list Brizzi as part of that group.

In his letter to supporters, Brizzi said his current CLST stake is worth about $7,500, based on the stock price of about 10 cents a share. That indicates he owns about 75,000 shares. Purchasing that quantity in 2005 would have cost $24,000 at the stock’s low for the year and $340,500 at the stock’s high. Yet in his WXNT interview, Brizzi said he spent less than $10,000 to buy the shares.

When Brizzi acquired his stake, the company was known as CellStar Corp. and was in the cell-phone distribution business. It later sold off those operations to locally based Brightpoint Inc. and other firms and distributed $2.10 per share in cash dividends to stockholders.

CLST was in wind-down mode until about a year ago, when it suddenly began purchasing customer-finance receivables, including some from Fair Finance. Fair filings with Ohio securities regulators show that, at the time, Fair was strained for cash and was seeking money to repay purchasers of its investment certificates.

Brizzi’s disclosure statements dating to 2001 never have listed ownership of more than five individual stocks in a single year, though the federal filing from this year shows him owning more than a half dozen mutual funds, each with between $1,000 and $15,000 in assets.

Brizzi earns $125,000 a year as prosecutor and doesn’t have extensive assets. The federal filing shows he owes between $100,000 and $250,000 on a loan he took out to buy ownership interests in the local restaurant Harry & Izzy’s. The filing shows he still is paying off student loans.

Papers filed in connection with his divorce, which was finalized in February, showed he and his wife had three residences, but with first and second mortgages on all of them.•

The more reporters dig for information, the more troubling the questions about Brizzi's financial relationship with Durham become.