Jurors in P.G. Sittenfeld’s political corruption trial deliberated for about 1 hour and 15 minutes Wednesday before they left the night. (The video in the player above is from an earlier report.)The former Cincinnati city councilman faces six charges which include two counts each of honest services wire fraud, bribery and attempted extortion. Sittenfeld is accused of accepting $40,000 in campaign donations in exchange for helping to move a development project at 435 Elm Street forward.During closing arguments, prosecutor Matthew Singer spent more than 90 minutes highlighting some of their evidence and explaining how it relates to the law. He posed what he called a “simple question” to the jury, “Did Mr. Sittenfeld agree to accept money knowing that it was in exchange for specific official action?” Singer said, “The answer is, yes.”Singer replayed portions of recorded phone conversations and meetings between Sittenfeld, undercover FBI agents posing as investors and Chinedum Ndukwe. Ndukwe is a former Bengal turned developer who was secretly working for the FBI. In multiple conversations, there were discussions of developing 435 Elm followed by talk of campaign donations.Jurors, again, saw photos of all of the checks that the undercover agents had given to Sittenfeld for his PAC. They totaled $40,000.Singer made it clear to the jury that it is not a defense for Sittenfeld to claim he would have supported the project anyway,Defense attorney Charlie Rittgers posed a different question to the jury, “Did he (Sittenfeld) have corrupt intent?”Rittgers said “everything in this case comes down to intent” and argued “there was no bribe.”Rittgers said the only quid pro quo is “P.G. saying there won’t be one.”Rittgers also reminded jurors that two of the government’s witnesses had been under investigation for federal crimes. Rittgers said they “have all the incentive in the world to work with the federal government.”As for Sittenfeld telling the undercover FBI agents that he could “get the votes” or “shepherd the votes” related to the 435 Elm project, Rittgers said it wasn’t unusual for elected officials to say that. “That is an everyday occurrence,” Rittgers said.Deliberations are scheduled to resume at 9 a.m. Thursday.
Jurors in P.G. Sittenfeld’s political corruption trial deliberated for about 1 hour and 15 minutes Wednesday before they left the night.
(The video in the player above is from an earlier report.)
The former Cincinnati city councilman faces six charges which include two counts each of honest services wire fraud, bribery and attempted extortion.
Sittenfeld is accused of accepting $40,000 in campaign donations in exchange for helping to move a development project at 435 Elm Street forward.
During closing arguments, prosecutor Matthew Singer spent more than 90 minutes highlighting some of their evidence and explaining how it relates to the law.
He posed what he called a “simple question” to the jury, “Did Mr. Sittenfeld agree to accept money knowing that it was in exchange for specific official action?” Singer said, “The answer is, yes.”
Singer replayed portions of recorded phone conversations and meetings between Sittenfeld, undercover FBI agents posing as investors and Chinedum Ndukwe.
Ndukwe is a former Bengal turned developer who was secretly working for the FBI.
In multiple conversations, there were discussions of developing 435 Elm followed by talk of campaign donations.
Jurors, again, saw photos of all of the checks that the undercover agents had given to Sittenfeld for his PAC. They totaled $40,000.
Singer made it clear to the jury that it is not a defense for Sittenfeld to claim he would have supported the project anyway,
Defense attorney Charlie Rittgers posed a different question to the jury, “Did he (Sittenfeld) have corrupt intent?”
Rittgers said “everything in this case comes down to intent” and argued “there was no bribe.”
Rittgers said the only quid pro quo is “P.G. saying there won’t be one.”
Rittgers also reminded jurors that two of the government’s witnesses had been under investigation for federal crimes.
Rittgers said they “have all the incentive in the world to work with the federal government.”
As for Sittenfeld telling the undercover FBI agents that he could “get the votes” or “shepherd the votes” related to the 435 Elm project, Rittgers said it wasn’t unusual for elected officials to say that.
“That is an everyday occurrence,” Rittgers said.
Deliberations are scheduled to resume at 9 a.m. Thursday.
