Published Tuesday, April 9, 2002
CLEVELAND
Jury deliberating Traficant bribery caseCLEVELAND (AP) -- Jurors returned to federal court Tuesday for the second day of deliberations in the corruption trial of U.S. Rep. James A. Traficant Jr.
The blustery, nine-term congressman declared Monday: "There’s not one damn bit of evidence that anybody gave me any money."
Although he is not a lawyer, Traficant defended himself in the trial that began 2 1/2 months ago. He suggested during closing arguments that he was the victim of a government vendetta.
"Congress has been passing laws. They have given the IRS and FBI too damn much power, and when you are born in the United States of America, you are born into a partnership with the IRS the day you are born," he said.
Federal prosecutor Craig Morford told jurors that Traficant "is the government."
"If the government’s so bad, what’s he been doing for the last 18 years?" Morford said.
The prosecutor said that while Traficant may have been an effective congressman, he is not above the law.
"He can’t use his public office as a trough to feed his personal appetite," Morford said.
Traficant, 60, a Democrat known for his arm-waving tirades on the House floor against the IRS and the FBI, is accused of taking kickbacks from staff members and accepting gifts and free labor from businessmen in exchange for his political help. He also is accused of filing false tax returns.
He faces up to 63 years in prison if convicted of all 10 counts. However, he probably would receive a much shorter sentence because of federal sentencing guidelines.
Traficant, who at times has shouted during the trial and once stormed out of the courtroom, sat largely silent as the prosecutor spoke.
During his closing, Traficant shouted from the lectern and then walked to the front of the jury box and dropped his voice to an intense near-whisper.
U.S. District Judge Lesley Wells interrupted Traficant several times to prevent him from bringing up evidence that had been barred or referring to his previous legal battles with the government.
Traficant argued that without tapes or photographs of him committing crimes, the only evidence against him was the testimony of witnesses who have pleaded guilty to other crimes and could be manipulated by the government.
He said it is impossible to believe the government’s claim that his conversations had never been taped. He showed the jury pictures of a clandestine recording device as an example of how easy it would have been.