A federal judge has rejected former Sen. Bob Menendez's bid to overturn his corruption conviction.
The Hill reported that this dismissal dashes Menendez's hopes for a retrial over claims of jury exposure to improperly redacted evidence.
Bob Menendez, previously a Democratic Senator from New Jersey, was convicted alongside businessmen Wael Hana and Fred Daibes on charges of corruption.
Their trial, which stretched over nine weeks, concluded in July with guilty verdicts on all 16 charges, which included bribery and acting as a foreign agent.
Following his conviction, Menendez resigned from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in August. His sentencing is set for January 29, with federal prosecutors recommending a 15-year prison term.
The case against Menendez and his associates was handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York. After the convictions, an issue arose concerning the evidential material given to the jury; it was found that nine trial exhibits had been improperly redacted.
This discovery came to light as it was noted that these exhibits were on a laptop used during jury deliberations in November.
However, U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein ruled in his 14-page decision that the responsibility for this oversight fell on the defendants for not objecting earlier to the inclusion of these exhibits.
Judge Stein argued that the improperly redacted material was unlikely to have influenced the jury's decision significantly, due to its minor role among the more extensive proofs presented at trial.
Reacting to the judge's decision, Menendez expressed his outrage. "To think that prosecutors can put unconstitutional and inadmissible evidence in front of the jury, assure the defense they only provided the jury with admitted exhibits, and escape any consequences, is outrageous," said Menendez.
He further criticized the prosecutorial approach, suggesting it reflects broader issues within the justice system. "This is precisely the sort of misconduct by prosecutors that has caused so many to question the motives and judgments of overzealous prosecutors who act above the law and believe they are unanswerable to anyone," Menendez added.
Though Menendez and his co-defendants argued that the mistake with the exhibits should nullify the jury’s verdict, Judge Stein's ruling pointed out that the chance of these improperly redacted documents affecting the outcome was "infinitesimal."
"Because the defendants have waived any objection to the improperly redacted contents of the laptop and its submission to the jury and because the defendants were not prejudiced by the improperly redacted material, defendants’ supplemental motions for a new trial are denied," stated U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein in his ruling.
The judgment not only underscores the speculative influence of improper evidence on jury decisions but also reaffirms the defendants' oversight in not addressing the issue when the exhibits were initially presented.
This decision arrives just days before Menendez is set to be sentenced amidst calls for a substantial prison term matching the severity of the offenses.
With his political career already significantly marred by his resignation and the scandal, the denial of a retrial marks another setback for Menendez as he faces the forthcoming consequences of his actions.