Postville, IA – Federal prosecutors have agreed to drop identity-theft charges against Sholom Rubashkin, former executive at Agriprocessors in a light of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision.
Prosecutors this afternoon asked a federal judge to dismiss seven counts of aiding and abetting aggravated identity theft, in response to a motion filed last week by Rubashkin’s lawyer.
Defense lawyer Guy Cook hailed the request as a victory for his client and a government admission of “overreaching in this case.”
Government lawyers said the charges stemmed from violations that could have prosecuted until the recent Supreme Court ruling.
“There is nothing ‘unfair’ or ‘overreaching’ about subjecting defendant Rubashkin to the same laws as others,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Peter Deegan wrote in court papers.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last week that prosecutors who file identity-theft charges must prove the defendant knew that the information used belonged to another person.
Rubashkin was arrested last year on immigration, bank fraud and cattle-related charges, along with several other employees identified in what was then a 99-count indictment. The arrests followed a May 12, 2008, immigration raid at Agriprocessors Inc. that led to the arrest of 389 immigrant workers. The kosher meat plant also has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and is seeking buyers.
Rubashkin also is among several employees charged with state-level child labor violations. He has pleaded not guilty to the state and federal charges.
(Source: Des Moines Register)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
4 Responses
To all the people and groups such as “Uri L’Tzedek” that have been bashing Rubashkins for things they did not do, owe them and the jewish community as a whole an apology.
First… Oh i guess it was that little thing called lack of evidence.
I trust that many, many more charges will be dropped and that this case will finally only be judged on its merits or the lack thereof. I find it amazing that with the millions of illegal aliens in the country there was only one place for them to work!
“Government lawyers said the charges stemmed from violations that could have prosecuted until the recent Supreme Court ruling.” –that is a self-serving way of saying it.
The charges could never have been SUCESSFULLY prosecuted since the Supreme Court would have thrown them out because it was clear under American law that you can’t be prosecuted for a crime absent “mens rea” (intent to violate the law).
Lack of evidence suggests a prosecutor rushed to start a case, and then realized there wasn’t enough evidence. Bringing a case on a legal theory that is rejected by the Supreme Court, suggests a big hunk of the Justice Department didn’t pay attention in law school.