I am not one to take notice of cases tried in the courts or of  their outcome. However upon reading an article delineating the criminal charges that Mr. Sholom Rubashkin was convicted of and the subsequent sentence being requested by the prosecutors, I found myself asking can this really be happening in “the land of the free” where everyone is entitled to equal and fair administration of justice? This most troubling question  compelled me to pen this letter.

Of course, I am concerned for Mr. Rubashkin and his family, however I am equally concerned  as to what the ramifications and repercussions might be on the general state of our judicial system as a result of the outcome of this case. I am not very knowledgeable in the laws of the employment of illegal immigrants or as to what constitutes bank fraud, however as a concerned citizen of this beautiful democratic country, it is my right and duty to express my overall uneasiness in regard to how Mr. Rubashkin’s case was handled.

Going back to May 2008 when the original raid on the Rubashkin/Agriprocessors plant searching for illegal immigrant employees took place, I found myself asking, did this raid truly require the employment of 600 federal agents, supported by military helicopters. Was the government in pursuit of drug lords, murderers, weapon smugglers or the like. My question is only compounded by the fact that Mr. Rubashkin’s lawyers had already offered to resolve the entire matter in a most cooperative manner.  It is most interesting how when the government learned that two of the nation’s largest meat packing companies Swift and Tyson were both employing even more illegal immigrants than Agriprocessers, those companies were given the opportunity to negotiate and resolve their issues without any raids on their plants or any tumult whatsoever. I therefore wonder why was the Rubashkin plant singled out?

Shockingly, Mr. Rubashkin was denied bail, while others in the very same predicament where not imprisoned while awaiting  trial or sentencing. In the Rubashkin case the presiding judge “came up” with a preposterous dangerous original argument. She opined that any Jew in the United States awaiting sentencing for crimes committed is to be considered a “flight risk” that he might possibly flee to Israel under Israel’s “Law of Return” if freed on bail, and thus bail should not be granted. This of course would not just affect Mr. Rubashkin and any Jew, but potentially could have a serious major ripple effect on all ethnic and religious groups living in this great country.

Regarding Mr.Rubashkin’s conviction on bank fraud and the subsequent request that he be given what amounts to a life sentence, this is beyond comprehension and simply unfathomable. He never requested more from the bank then his original $35 million dollar line of credit. Although it is true that false invoices were generated under his watch to inflate the total accounts receivable to insure his line of credit, he always made timely payments with interest on all his loans. Those invoices were NEVER used for the purpose of seeking payments for any product that was not sold. The bank acknowledged receiving approximately twenty-one million dollars in profit from the interest payments throughout the life span of the loan granted Mr. Rubashkin. The bank was more than thrilled to continue having Mr. Rubashkin as a client. Who then, may I ask, were the “victims” in this case?

The reason Mr. Rubashkin discontinued reimbursing the bank for the loans was due to the highly publicized inexplicable nature of the government’s raid on his plant , which resulted in the entire Rubaskhin enterprise being forced into bankruptcy, he was left with absolutely no funds . He was totally incapable of repaying any portion of the loans from personal money because as a result of his enormous philanthropic endeavors and total selfless commitment over the years to the support of literally hundreds and hundreds of destitute needy individuals, coupled with his most generous donations to many worthy institutions and charitable organizations , he was entirely depleted of personal monies. Everyone acknowledges there was never any intention on the part of Mr. Rubashkin to cause any losses or to harm anyone , it was only that after the raid things spun so rapidly out of control, he no longer had any viable options whatsoever. How then, in all fairness , can the prosecutors be recommending that he be sentenced to what amounts to a life sentence ?

I shudder to even think that in today’s day and age there could possibly be some hidden agenda or underlying prejudice in regard to how Mr. Rubashkin is being treated . However certain events are simply so incomprehensible they seem to indicate that this is indeed the case. The government’s action described above in how the raid was conducted, his being refused bail while awaiting sentencing or the prosecutors’ attempt to charge Mr . Rubashkin for having violated the “1921 law of Packers and Stockyards Act”, an offense that no individual , in history , was ever prosecuted for since the very inception of this law, are just a few examples of this inconsistent unfair treatment in the Rubashkin case.

Please understand that in no way am I condoning the illegalities committed by Mr. Rubashkin , nor am I suggesting that he not “serve time” for his crimes.  I am merely appealing for fairness in the administration of justice in the sentencing of Mr. Rubashkin. It is only just that the horrific toll the brutally difficult circumstances of Mr.Rubashkin’s incarceration continues to take on the entire Rubashkin family (including a teenage autistic child) and the fact that he is a first time , non-violent offender convicted of financial improprieties of which he had no personal benefit, and his lifelong acts of benevolence to so many people and causes, all should serve as factors taken into account when determining his sentence.

Thank you for your consideration.

As a believer in the judicial system and a concerned citizen of this great country , I remain,

Respectfully,
 
Yudi Sherer
Lakewood N.J.

(YWN Desk – NYC)