Search
Close this search box.

Judge Considers Prejudice In Rubashkin Grand Jury Indictment


ruba.jpgThe Iowa Independent reports: Defense attorneys painted an unappealing picture of anti-Semitism for U.S. District Court Judge Linda Reade Monday during a hearing to determine if charges against a former Agriprocessors executive should be dropped, or the case moved to a different court or heard separately from others indicted in the aftermath of a massive 2008 immigration raid.

Sholom M. Rubashkin, the highest ranking day-to-day corporate officer at the Postville meatpacking plant, faces a total of 97 charges ranging from bank fraud to immigration-related offenses that, when combined, carry a possible maximum sentence of more than 2,000 years in prison.

Attorneys argued Monday that anti-Semitic stereotypes were present in grand jury testimony and that the resulting indictment was tainted from the beginning against their client. It’s an opinion shared by Dr. Patricia F. Kuehn, an Illinois-based consultant hired by the defense.

People who are repeatedly exposed to stereotypes “have no other option but to be prejudiced,” Kuehn testified, according to Erika Binegar of the Cedar Rapids Gazette. Kuehn specifically pointed to references to Rubashkin as a “Jewish guy with a small hat and a beard” and to religious considerations that prevent some Jews from collecting interest on loans to others of the same faith.

Prosecutors depicted Kuehn’s testimony as limited, indicting that she was privy to only portions of the grand jury testimony and that she used surveys of American attitudes and expert affidavits to construct the difference.

The strongest criticisms expressed at the hearing, according to a report filed by the Associated Press, were reserved for the press, bloggers and Iowa Gov. Chet Culver.

Stating that Rubashkin had already been convicted in the “court of public opinion,” defense attorney Guy Cook presented Reade with various news articles, editorials and blog comments.

Jim Clarity, an attorney representing Agriprocessors’ interests, referred to the pretrial publicity as “sickening” and compared the plight of mounting a defense in the Northern District of Iowa to that of the Jews facing Nazi persecution in 1939 Poland.

“Move it to Minnesota or Chicago, but not Iowa because Iowa is poison,” Clarity said.

Culver was mentioned by name due in large part to an August editorial that implied plant management had taken a “low road” and compared the situation in Postville to the scene described in novelist Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle.”

Reade, who reversed an earlier decision to keep Rubashkin behind bars until his September trial date and allowed review of grand jury testimony by the defense’s consultant, did not make a ruling following Monday’s testimony.

Reade ordered Feb. 18 that grand jury testimony could be viewed by Dr. Mollie Marti, an expert trial witness identified by Rubashkin’s legal team. But a conflict prevented Marti from attending the scheduled Monday hearing; Marti suggested Kuehn, and Reade agreed to the change.

Agriprocessors, which never fully recovered from the immigration raid in May, has limited production while under the supervision of a Chapter 11 bankruptcy trustee. A sale of assets has been scheduled for March 23.



2 Responses

  1. The government’s role in this is criminal! Bank fraud? Banks are in no position today to accuse anyone of fraud. What fraud?

    Immigration-related offenses? The government does not use our taxpayer money to adequately guard our southern border, leaving the country festering with illegals seen in every town across America. The singling out of Shlomo Rubashkin for “immigration-related” offenses when illegals are getting government financial aid, credit cards, driver licenses, enrolling in public schools, showing up at hospitals for free, unlimited care, and standing on the curb actively flagging down cars for work – the singling out of Shlomo Rubashkin is CLEARLY anti-semitic at it’s core.

    Drop the charges!

  2. Not only that but the judge himself displayed anti-Semitism and ignorance when he stated that Rubashkink is a Jew and could flee to Israel.

    1 – I don’t remember anything in the press to indicate that Rubashikin was an Israeli Citizen.

    2 – Israel offers Jews very limited protection. Its protection is limited to citizens who are residents at the time of the alleged crime. Even there it does not offer them freedom from prosecution, merely that their prosecution and incarceration will be limited to Israel.

    I also find it hard to believe that Rubashkins is the only place where the government can find illegal aliens. All this reeks of an agenda. And don’t think that American Jews aren’t all paying for it in the cost of kosher food, especially those who live in far-flung areas where the costs have doubled since the raid.

Leave a Reply


Popular Posts