Tom Noe: Coin victim.

[truthteller]

Good Lord. Plead guilty and be done with it already.

 

 

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060818/SRRARECOINS/308180005/-1/SRRARECOINS2

 

 

COIN SCANDAL

Noe's lawyers say he was an extortion victim

 

 

By MIKE WILKINSON

BLADE STAFF WRITER

 

 

Tom Noe's attorneys, in a motion filed this week, have painted their client as a victim of extortion by the former chief financial officer of the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation.

 

In a request before a Lucas County judge to exclude evidence from the case, Noe's attorneys argue that his $25,000 investment in a Toledo area technology firm on behalf of Terry Gasper was not a bribe.

 

Gasper has pleaded guilty to federal public corruption charges that claim he steered bureau investment business to several firms in exchange for use of a Florida condominium, cash, and other benefits.

 

He is cooperating with investigators involved in a broader probe of the bureau and is awaiting sentencing.

 

But John Mitchell, Noe's lead defense attorney, dismissed the argument that the $25,000 investment that Noe allegedly made in Lightsource Partnership - deposited in the name of Gasper's girlfriend - was a bribe.

 

"What the state has characterized as a 'bribe' is nothing of the sort," Mr. Mitchell wrote.

 

In the "bill of information" to which Gasper pleaded guilty, federal prosecutors say that he "through extortion" agreed to have Noe - identified as "dealer No. 1" - provide money "and other things of value" in exchange for investment business.

 

Noe has not been charged with a crime in relation to Gasper and federal authorities have not said if he will. A similar charge involving Gasper - using the same "through extortion" language - refers to two stock brokers, both of whom have been indicted for bribery and other charges.

 

Mr. Mitchell argued the Gasper connection, as well as other evidence identified by prosecutors should be excluded from the trial because it is irrelevant and would unfairly prejudice a jury.

 

"The tate's attempt to introduce evidence of these other acts is for the sole purpose of making Mr. Noe appear to the jury to be a bad person," Mr. Mitchell wrote.

 

Prosecutors have not had time yet to respond to the motion and declined comment yesterday.

 

Both defense attorneys and prosecutors are eagerly awaiting a ruling from Judge Thomas Osowik on several defense motions that attack the prosecution's case. Noe's legal team wants the judge to suppress evidence, drop several charges, and consolidate others.

 

If in favor of the defense, the rulings could diminish the potential penalty Noe faces. Although there were indications he would rule this week, Judge Osowik said yesterday they will likely be available early next week.

 

In his new motion, Mr. Mitchell also accused the county prosecutor's office of putting Noe's [embarrassing lack of self control] politics on trial. Although not pointed out in the filing, the Lucas County Prosecutor, Julia Bates, is a [embarrassing lack of self control].

 

Noe was a prominent [embarrassing lack of self control] appointed by Gov. Bob Taft and former governor George Voinovich to prominent positions with the Ohio Board of Regents and the Ohio Turnpike Commission. He was a generous fund-raiser who gave and raised more than $200,000 for candidates and the [embarrassing lack of self control] party.

 

"The state is attempting to put Mr. Noe's politics, rather than alleged criminal conduct, on trial," Mr. Mitchell wrote.

 

Noe is charged with stealing more than $1 million from two rare coin funds he managed on behalf of the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation. If convicted, he could face dozens of years in prison. He has pleaded not guilty.

 

Noe is awaiting a Sept. 12 sentencing in U.S. District Court, where he pleaded guilty to three federal campaign finance charges stemming from his use of two dozen friends and associates to illegally contribute more than $45,000 to President Bush's reelection campaign. Lucas County prosecutors have indicated they may use his federal conviction in their case.

 

Mr. Mitchell, in his motion to Judge Osowik, said he should exclude the conviction because it is "irrelevant" and "highly prejudicial."

 

The attorneys' motion is in response to a list of evidence provided by prosecutors to the defense. It includes a wide range of evidence, some of which may not be used at trial.

 

Contact Mike Wilkinson at:

mwilkinson@theblade.com

or 419-724-6104.

[gmarguli]

This is the Toledo Blade you are citing. It's only value would be if it were printed on softer paper so you could wipe your [embarrassing lack of self control] with it.

[jom]

This is the Toledo Blade you are citing. It's only value would be if it were printed on softer paper so you could wipe your [embarrassing lack of self control] with it.

 

Wait...you want to wipe your [embarrassing lack of self control] with a Blade?

 

jom

[Here]

No, not a blade, a Toledo Blade!

 

 

 

Jerry

[Wihlborg]

This is the Toledo Blade you are citing. It's only value would be if it were printed on softer paper so you could wipe your [embarrassing lack of self control] with it.

 

 

John