[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 6]
[House]
[Page 8747]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           CRIMINAL EXTORTION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Inglis of South Carolina). Under a 
previous order of the House, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from 
Alabama (Mr. Davis) for his touching remarks. He is so right.
  Mr. Speaker, I would also like to pay tribute as my colleague, a 
former judge, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe) has indicated a 
celebration of Cinco de Mayo. We will be enjoying that this weekend 
there in Tyler. I appreciate Gus Ramirez and Salvador Sanchez and other 
friends that are putting that on again this year.
  Last week I read an article about the ongoing investigation in Austin 
by the local Democrat District Attorney, Ronnie Earl, and became 
concerned. I had previously understood that he had convinced a grand 
jury to indict a number of corporations regarding contributions they 
had made from which he was raising the issue of legality. For some 
reason I had the impression that a few of those corporations had pled 
either no contest or guilty, and as part of a plea agreement, they had 
agreed to make contributions to some educational entity.
  Now, I realize I cannot always rely on every newspaper to always get 
the facts right, so I went back and looked at other newspaper articles 
about other cases after I saw that one, and according to those articles 
the Austin District Attorney got potentially four corporate defendants 
to promise to pay financial support to the LBJ School of Public Affairs 
there in Austin and in return he would dismiss all charges.
  Now, as a former District Judge and Chief Justice this caused me a 
great deal of concern. As a former District Judge who believes strongly 
in law and order, so much so that I have sent friends or children of 
friends to prison while my friends were weeping and asking me not to do 
so, because I knew that is what the law required and that is what I 
would do in any other case if they were not the children of my friends.
  So I believe that there is a crime and there is an appropriate 
punishment. And I do not know all the facts or evidence in these cases 
and I am not here to defend anyone involved. But I do know that 
District Attorneys take an oath as attorneys and they also take oaths 
as a District Attorney. They are not supposed to prosecute or persecute 
people or entities unless there is a case.
  Now, if there is evidence to support that a crime has been committed, 
then he should prosecute. When the District Attorney in Austin files a 
motion to dismiss, it should be because there is no case with which to 
go forward.
  If a district attorney drops charges after soliciting and requiring a 
defendant to pay money to an entity of the District Attorney's 
choosing, it has a rather unseemly odor to it. Let me explain one of 
the reasons that it may.
  Under the Texas Penal Code Section 36.02, it indicates in part, and 
there is a bunch of different wording in parts to it but I will read 
potentially applicable parts that may have a ring to them.
  A, a person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly, 
there are different words, but intentionally or knowingly solicits from 
another any benefit as consideration for the recipient's decision, 
vote, recommendation, or other exercise of official discretion in a 
judicial or administrative proceeding.
  An offense under the section is a felony under the second degree. It 
may be the ``benefit'' under this would have to go to the individual 
itself but since the law does not say, we will let somebody else 
determine that. But regardless, if a D.A. can force people or entities 
to pay in order to avoid being prosecuted, then no one is safe from 
extortion. Whether or not the entity receiving the benefit is worthy is 
not the issue.
  Whether it is a criminal offense to get someone to agree to pay money 
to another in order to avoid being prosecuted under the law is raised 
here. Whether or not such conduct rises to the level of criminal status 
is for others to decide, but it sure smells like extortion, even if the 
law allows it. A fine institution like the LBJ School should not have 
to rely on extortion in order to funds its education.
  Right now the legislature is meeting in Texas to try to fund our 
education. How tragic if it turns out it was legal to fund educational 
institutions just by threatening to prosecute if somebody does not pay 
the chosen school of the bullying law enforcement agency.
  In Austin, the district attorney is allegedly investigating illegal 
payments. What irony if he will only drop charges as part of his 
official duties if you make the very kind of payments he was supposed 
to be investigating.
  Sounds like the wolf is in charge of the hen house in Austin.

                          ____________________