home

Sam Riddle Arraigned in Detroit Corruption Case

The Detroit corruption case that snagged Monica Conyers, wife of Rep. John Conyers, continues to grow. Political adviser Sam Riddle (well known in Colorado for his representation of the family of Isaiah Shoels, a student killed at Columbine) and his significant other, Mary Waters pleaded not guilty to corruption charges in federal court Thursday. The charges were expected and both have maintained their innocence, reportedly refusing to consider plea offers. Ms. Waters' attorney, Todd Flood, had a great line after court:

Asked how Waters is holding up, Flood replied, "She continues to inspire me."

Riddle said:

"I will not be a fall guy for the privileged or well-connected."

After his arraignment, he tweeted:

My arraignment in Fed Ct was intense-had to take deep breath to respond to judge. My lawyer David Stiengold w/30 years fed exp chills me out.”

[More...]

As to the charges:

[Riddle] was charged in two indictments with 10 criminal counts that include conspiracy, bribery, extortion, mail fraud and making false statements to the FBI. The most serious charges carry 20-year penalties.

Waters is charged in one indictment with one count of conspiracy and two counts of bribery. The most serious charges carry 10-year penalties.

< Sunday Morning Open Thread | Sunday Evening Open Thread >
  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    dark avenger, (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by cpinva on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 07:27:42 PM EST
    no one ever claimed that the republicans in my fair commonwealth are the brightest bulbs in our political box. :)

    donald, while i applaud your efforts to apprise your state's legislators of their ethical obligations, it concerns me that supposed adults would need to be.

    many years ago, as a consequence of the newt gingrich inspired congressional dog-and-pony show, i and my colleagues were required to attend an 8 hour ethics class. it came complete with a lovely folder full of inspirational (and expensively produced) pamphlets, etc. we had  presentations by various and sundry members of upper-class officialdom.

    my comment to my manager (in charge of the proceedings) afterwards was: "if, at this point in your life, you still don't know the difference between right and wrong, i fail to see how an 8 hour class is going to resolve that." he did not disagree.

    and that's really what ethics boils down to: the difference between right and wrong actions.

    Relativism? (none / 0) (#7)
    by Fabian on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 08:52:01 AM EST
    I think some people get into trouble because they don't think in terms of "right and wrong" or "ethical or unethical" or even "legal or illegal".  I think some people see The Other Kidz doing something and think "I want a piece of that action!".  It doesn't occur to them that just because The Other Kidz are doing something doesn't mean it is right, ethical or legal.

    Parent
    Also (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by nyjets on Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 01:52:05 PM EST
    In addition people also aske themselves: 'Will I get caught', 'What will happen if I am caught', and 'Is the risk of getting caught worse the benefit of doing something wrong.'
    For the most part, I have found that most people are dishonest by nature and are rarely concerned with right or wrong.


    Parent
    Ouch! (none / 0) (#1)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 12:30:19 PM EST
    In defense of Mr. Riddle and Ms. Walters, I long ago concluded from my own experience as senior legislative analyst to State House Democratic leadership in Honolulu that many lobbyists and elected officials are in fact remarkably ignorant of public ethics laws which should ostensibly govern and guide their public conduct.

    I can't speak with any degree of authority regarding the controlling Michigan ethics rules and / or statutes, but perhaps each state should consider enacting mandatory ethics training for registered lobbyists, public officials (both elected and appointed) and their senior staff, in the manner that it was for me by institutional rule when I served as a legislative staff member in Hawaii.

    Astonishingly, lobbyists are exempt from such a requirement in Hawaii, and until recently it was optional for elected officials, when convictions of two Honolulu city councilmembers for public corruption prompted an internal change of policy at our legislature. Now, newly elected state legislators are given eight hours of mandatory ethics training (still optional for returning incumbents) prior to being issued office keys and allowed to hire staff.

    I must disclose my own interest in such matters, in that I was author / advocate for Rule No. 60 of the Rules of the Hawaii State House of Representatives, which governs the official conduct of both elected members of that body and their appointed staff.

    I had initially drafted the rule in 1993 on my own while serving as chief clerk of the State Senate judiciary Committee, having become increasingly frustrated with observing conduct I had come to regard as ethically obtuse.

    However, I had to wait patiently until December 1998 when I was then working for the House Majority Floor Leader, and a new Speaker took charge who proved to be highly approachable. He agreed to first hear me out in private, and then to my surprise said he would recommend the rule's immediate adoption by House members. The State Senate subsequently adopted it verbatim two years later as Senate Rule No. 57. I still consider that my proudest professional accomplishment as a legislative staff member.

    Aloha.

    I agree. (none / 0) (#2)
    by Fabian on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 01:00:15 PM EST
    A lot of times people do clueless things because they are, indeed, clueless.  They really are ignorant.  Mandatory training would attempt to address the ignorance.

    Parent
    Defense attorney's nightmare (none / 0) (#3)
    by jbindc on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:10:42 PM EST
    Sam Riddle just won't shut up. His attorney must hate defending him - up to the point he was arraigned, he would make public statements, give interviews, and call into radio stations.

    Here's some more background - he and Mary Waters are the 8th and 9th people charged in this bribery scheme.

    jJeralyn, do make your clients (none / 0) (#4)
    by oculus on Sun Jul 19, 2009 at 02:47:09 PM EST
    promise in writing they won't tweet?  What a disaster in the making.