WNPR
A judge known for cracking down on corruption talked tough Friday — but gave a confessed campaign-fraud conspirator a break.
The judge, Janet Bond Arterton, handed down a sentence in U.S. District Court in New Haven that spared Brian Foley jail time for a crime that she said undermines democracy.
Foley (pictured) — a millionaire nursing home CEO (and vanity-press children’s author) who tried to help buy his wife, Lisa Wilson-Foley, a Congressional seat in 2012 by surreptitiously steering money to former Gov. John G. Rowland for advice — was sentenced to three years’ probation and a $30,000 fine. He is to serve the first three months in a halfway house.
At the recommendation of prosecutors, Foley caught a break because he cooperated with the government in the bigger case: against repeat offender ex-Gov. Rowland. He came clean about how he arranged for Rowland to receive money surreptitiously through his Apple Rehab nursing-home chain for advice to Wilson-Foley’s campaign.
Foley did not necessarily catch a break when it came to which judge would sentence him. Or so it seemed. Judge Arterton is known for sentencing white-collar criminals, in particular corrupt politicians like former Bridgeport Mayor Joseph Ganim, to more jail time than do some of her colleagues.
Appearing before Arterton Friday, Foley sought to counter any impression that he is a privileged wealthy CEO. He spoke of being beaten as a kid by his father, and described himself as a successful, honorable, ethical businessman and super-dad who slipped up just this once because of his love for his wife.
Arterton spoke for 15 minutes from the bench as she handed down the sentence. She spoke of how Foley’s misdemeanor fits into the broader challenge of maintaining a credible system of democracy.
She said she was making sure that Foley nevertheless suffered “consequences” for his act: He’ll have to pay the $100.50 daily cost of his stay in the halfway house. The accommodations there will be ” a far cry form the comforts and freedoms of your everyday life,” she observed.
“The federal courts see many kinds of criminal conspiracies, narcotics, financial fraud,” Arterton said. “They have their impact on different victim groups. So the narcotic-related conspiracies will impact communities, families. The financial frauds will impact investors.”
“But the kinds of fraudulent conspiracies that attempt to violate the federal election laws, election frauds, those [impact] a very different community. It’s all the voters, and it’s a big community. It’s one that cares about who … is going … to govern them,” Arterton said, drawing out the last two phrases.
“You look elsewhere in the world, and when you have elections held in fledgling democracies that are regarded as unfair, untransparent, corrupted, they actually produce bloodshed and misery as the response.”
Federal election law seeks to limit financial influence in elections by disclosing who’s paying the bill for campaigns, she noted.
“Disclosure remains a critical part of the elections act. And because integrity in elections is so critical and fair elections are the bedrock of a democracy, crimes such as Mr. Foley’s that subvert the purpose of this law and defraud voters of the information with which they will make their voting choice are very serious. And in the criminal justice system, serious crimes are underscored by the prospect of prison. And as we discussed at the beginning, Mr. Foley faces up to a year in prison.”
Arterton noted Foley’s alleged ethics and good deeds in his life, though she added: “The devotion to his wife and his wife’s campaign … should be viewed within the context that were she successful, he would also bask in her reflected glory, even though there was no direct financial or other benefit to him.”
Liam Brennan, one of the prosecutors, asked the judge for a “substantial downward departure” from what the guidelines recommend.
Brennan (who lives in Westville) mentioned how “awkward” it is for a husband to have to assist prosecutors who are also going after his wife. Foley “did not shy away from that,” Brennan said.
“Cooperation, particularly in public corruption cases, is important,” Brennan said. “Without the knowledge of an insider, the government [often] cannot make these cases.”
Foley’s otherwise unblemished personal history would not alone justify a downward revision in his sentence, Arterton said. His crucial cooperation in the government’s prosecution of ex-Gov. Rowland and of his wife did.
“Not only did he come clean in his testimony,” Arterton said. “He enabled the government’s successful prosecution of a previously convicted former Connecticut governor as well as from a candidate for federal office. While his cooperation may have been a little late to the party, after unsuccessful efforts to throw investigators off the scent, when it started, it was key.”
Arterton is scheduled to sentence Lisa Wilson-Foley on Tuesday. Wilson-Foley did not cooperate with the government’s case — so she may face a tougher sentence than her husband received.
I dislike Rowland, but IMO, this is a nothing case, a distraction from the large-scale, real corruption of actual government officials that manages to go unprosecuted. So "voters" were unaware that Rowland advised a campaign, and a $30,000 fee was left off the campaign record. Big whoop. Most voters don't even educate themselves about the issues, attend debates, or learn of candidates' positions on things before voting. They just vote party lines no matter what. So the judge's speech about "democracy" and "voter rights" struck me as histrionic and totally divorced from the reality of politics, and scripted more for the media bites. Does anyone seriously think that if some Joe Schmo campaign consultant was involved instead of an ex-governor, we would be hearing about this and see the federal gov't mobilize resources for it? I don't think so. So to me, the case says more about the integrity of our judicial system than it does about the integrity of our "voting" system.