The jury in U.S. District Court in Manhattan found James Grant, a former New York City deputy inspector, not guilty on all charges, but still decided to convict one of the businessmen, Jeremy Reichberg, on several bribery and conspiracy charges involving other officers.
The jury found Reichberg not guilty on one count — that he had paid bribes to Grant. After the verdict, Grant turned to Reichberg and quietly said: “You’re going to be OK.”
The verdict appeared to reflect the higher bar the U.S. Supreme Court has set for public corruption cases with its 2016 ruling that reversed the bribery conviction of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell. In that ruling, the court determined that making introductions or setting up meetings, even in exchange for gifts or financial benefits, did not constitute a crime.
Federal prosecutors presented evidence they said documented years of corruption “big and small” in which high-ranking police officials provided favors to Reichberg and a second businessman, Jona S. Rechnitz. In return, prosecutors said, the officers received gifts, all-expenses-paid trips on private jets, dinners and access to prostitutes.
But after deliberating over three days for nearly 17 hours, the jurors said prosecutors failed to prove Grant had done favors in return for the gifts.
Throughout the trial, the defense maintained there was nothing criminal about the friendship between Grant, 45, and Reichberg, 44. Showing photos of the two men at a dining table inside Reichberg’s home, Susan R. Necheles, Reichberg’s lawyer, told jurors in her closing remarks: “We ask for help from our friends, and they ask for help from us. In life, it’s called friendship.”
Jurors said the panel determined almost immediately that Reichberg was guilty on most of the charges against him. But a majority of the panel was also convinced at the start of the deliberations that Grant was not guilty of accepting bribes.
“Grant was a flunky, a pawn to Rechnitz and Reichberg,” said one juror, Ives Bonilla, 67, of the Bronx. “He was overwhelmed by their wealth. He was razzled, dazzled by the millions they were talking about and spending.”
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.