POLITICAL CHICANERY IN THE OLD DOMINION

A TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE
By Charles W. Vincent, Ph.D.

 

Page 2

It is interesting that our present Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore, Past Lt-Governor Beyer, and their families, accepted the "gifts" of post-election vacations to a posh resort, and reported their "gifts" as campaign contributions. "Spokesman for Gilmore and Beyer said the free vacations were gifts to their respective campaigns and will be disclosed as required by law" "It will be fully reported and disclosed. Given that it's fully disclosed, which is what's required by law, there is no impropriety." (Full story at Enclosure A)

---------------------------------------
Past Governor George Allen also accepted similar campaign "gifts," as have the majority of our elected officials. Who is next to be selectively indicted and prosecuted? Or is the law to be politically, and selectively, misinterpreted only to nonpartisan school board members. The precedent established in my case puts most, about 99%, of our public officials at risk. In allowing this conviction, based on misinterpreted law, to stand without review the Supreme Court of Virginia has condoned the misinterpretation of law (11-75) to include legitimate campaign contributions, specifically solicited within the guidelines, advice, and authorization of the State Board of Elections. This has unleashed a "Pandora's box" on all elected officials. Our lawmakers should be outraged at this political misinterpretation of the law. Most of our elected public officials are in charge of procurement transactions and are now at risk of being politically targeted, as I was, at the whim of any Commonwealth Attorney. This is a flawed legal precedent that can, and most probably will, be used again when politically expedient. The law must apply equally to all. You cannot have one law say it is lawful to solicit and accept campaign contributions, then have another law misinterpreted to say campaign contributions are now "gifts" and, therefore, not lawful. Yet this is exactely what occurred in my case! (See Enclosure B)

-----------------------------
My reply to Judge Shadrick when asked if there was any reason I should not be found guilty: "Because I'm not guilty. The State Board of Elections clearly states that you are allowed to raise campaign contributions. I simply asked for a campaign contribution, not a "gift." If you are now going to interpret campaign contributions as gifts, then every elected official with procurement transaction authority, including the Commonwealth Attorney himself, should also be indicted and stand trial as I have had to do."

The Supreme Court of Virginia could, and certainly should, have resolved this important issue. Just about any elected official who has either "solicited or accepted" a campaign contribution can now be indicted and brought to trial for having accepted a "campaign contribution as a gift" and suffer my unjust fate. If the law is to be interpreted this way for me, then it must apply to all. Equal justice under the law goes to the very heart of our nation's democracy. (See Enclosure C )

-------------------------------
Our political-judicial system has, in my opinion, allowed a politically motivated commonwealth attorney to selectively prosecute me under a vague, little known, and deliberately misinterpreted law. The Supreme Court of Virginia could have resolved this matter but, as of this date, has chosen to abdicate their responsibility. Had I been a prominent Democratic or Republican official, instead of a nonpartisan elected school board member, perhaps they would have found the time to correct this travesty of justice. In today's politically correct world "perception is the reality" and indeed "the law takes a back-seat" to raw power and dirty political games.

This is the reality of my experience. If this can happen to me, and other citizens on a local public school board, what hope is there for any citizen likewise stripped of their constitutional rights and charged under misinterpreted laws? We live in politically troubled times, and the law can easily become a legal weapon and used against anyone - even a sitting President of the United States of America!

This wrongful conviction was an expensive, and painful, experience for me and my family. My case was allowed to politically spin out of control, and the system failed me. I can imagine the anguish the remaining board members endured when Mr. Humphreys proceeded with similar political misinterpretations of the law against them. None of our board members were "willful" either. The "resign or be indicted" ultimatum issued to them by Mr. Humphreys, after the unanticipated school budget shortfall, was absolutely disgraceful. The forced resignations of the majority of the members of our school board, all good and decent people, was an injustice that should have never occurred. It is said that "injustice anywhere threatens justice everywhere." I believe that this political business, misinterpreting the law for political advantage, is evil. It is amazing that we still have citizens willing to step forward, and risk serving our community, as school board members. I sincerely wish them a "Humphreys free" environment. They have a tough job even under the best of conditions. We should all pray for their success. Our children deserve this.

I do not regret trying to serve our community and its children as a school board member. I went in with the best of intentions and worked hard to effect positive changes in our school system. I am proud that it was my initiative to hire new teachers at the beginning of the school term, rather then adhere to the usual practice of waiting until nearly the end of each term, to address the problem of overcrowded classes. I supported an increase in teacher pay, and worked to attain adequate cost of living raises for all our employees. I had a crucial role in ridding our school system of a costly janitorial contract that was in the process of abolishing hundreds of custodial positions without the commensurate cost reductions and benefits that had been assured. I also had my defeats. The most publicized was my proposal to have an electronic voting board installed so the public could actually see how their board members cast their votes, which was overwhelmingly defeated ("too politically risky") by the full board. My proposal was ahead of its time, but this necessary tool was finally implemented three years later. Attending every training session of the Virginia School Boards Academy, I became the first "newly elected" school board member to have earned the VSBA Silver "Certificate of Excellence" Award for my commitment to effective school board governance.

Things happen to all of us, in the course of our lives, that are simply not fair. I have learned to take life as it comes and make the best of it. I no longer trust our "system" to do the honorable, the right, or even the lawful thing. Regrettably, "political expediency" is the token of the realm today. I did not accept my role as school board "scapegoat" without a fight, and my strength throughout this ordeal has been my family and my religious faith. My wife and children know the truth and they support me. All of us endured the pain and anguish of this unjust persecution. Clarence Darrow, the famed defense lawyer, once observed: "There is no such thing as justice--in or out of court. What our legal system most often does produce, when it doesn't falter altogether, is some approximation of justice." In my case the courts didn't even pretend - they simply took the politically expedient route and completely abdicated their responsibility. I do not wish Mr. Humphreys, Judge Shadrick, or anyone else involved in this bogus conviction any ill will. May they all have long, happy, and prosperous lives. I do hope they have learned something in the process. May they never again allow the misinterpretation of the law simply because it the easiest solution to a political problem. If I ever run for public office again, perhaps Mr. Humphreys will agree to be my Campaign Finance Manager - and keep me out of trouble. I have not lost my sense of humor, and my faith in my GOD has sustained me through tougher challenges in life than this political aberration. I take comfort in knowing he will be my ultimate Judge. God bless you. I remain, your friend, Charlie Vincent

Authorized by Charles W. Vincent

Enclosure A

The Washington Post, Wednesday, November, 1997
Gilmore, Beyer Take a Free Holiday - CSX Corp. Picks Up Tab at Posh Resort
By Ellen Nakashima, Washington Post Staff Writer

A few days after Republican James S. Gilmore III was elected Virginia's governor, he and his family unwound at one of the country's most luxurious mountain spas, the Greenbrier, in West Virginia. His vanquished opponent, Democratic Lt. Gov. Donald S. Beyer, Jr., also spent a few days decompressing with his family at the Greenbrier, which for more than 200 years has pampered princes and presidents, and where rooms range from $320 tp $500 a night. And at checkout time, neither Gilmore, or Beyer paid the bill.

Richmond-based CSX Corp., which is involved in the biggest proposed merger in railroad history and owns the Greenbrier, picked up the tab. The freebie is legal under Virginia election law -- which imposes few restrictions on donations to candidates. But it has raised the hackles of activists and others who argue that such gifts are improper and increase the cynicism of an already jaded electorate.. "If you have an electorate that feels totally disconnected from politicians - and there's no better evidence of that than in this last election, where only 1.7 million of 5 million eligible voters turned out - -then anything like this tends to diminish public confidence," said William H. Wood, executive director of the Sorensen Institute for Political Leadership at the University of Virginia.

"The general rule should be: Politicians ought not to accept freebies from anybody." Spokesman for Gilmore and Beyer said the free vacations were gifts to their respective campaigns and will be disclosed as required by law on their final finance reports, due Dec. 4.

They dismissed assertions that accepting the vacations was improper. "That's just ridiculous," said Gilmore spokesman Mark Miner. "CSX invited Jim and his family to be a guest at Greenbrier. They asked him and Don Beyer. Jim is not being influenced by any contribution or gift... He and his family went there for a little relaxation after the campaign." Beyer policy chief Randy Collins echoed Miller. "This is a trip that the lieutenant governor took as part of his recovery from his campaign," Collins said. "It will be fully reported and disclosed.

Given that it's fully disclosed, which is what's required by law, there is no impropriety." According to Greenbrier reservations staff, Gilmore, his wife and two sons stayed in a two-bedroom executive suite, which goes for $1,030 a night, for two nights. Beyer, his wife and three daughters stayed in a less expensive two-bedroom suite, which costs $558 a night, for four nights.

CSX officials said a CSX discount likely would be applied to those rates. Hotel staff said they could not give out information on whether the families were treated to other Greenbrier specialties, which include a Swedish massage or a dip in the white sulphur spring baths at the spa, services that run about $45 for a half hour.

Collins said accepting a free vacation after the election was no different from in-kind contributions made to candidates during the campaign for food, air travel and lodging. Gilmore, to date, has reported receiving $85,000 worth of travel and hotel expenses from companies, individuals or organizations. Beyer reported $83,000 in travel and hotel expenses from individuals, organizations and companies, including Don Beyer Volvo.

CSX, which last year had 10.5 billion in operating revenue, has no major requests pending before state government, but it is in the railroad's interest to maintain good relations with the governor of it's home state, said Frank Wilner, a Northern Virginia transportation consultant. The proposed $10.2 billion merger, in which CSX and Norfolk Southern want to gobble up Conrail Inc., is pending before the federal Surface Transportation Board.

Virginia has no vote in that decision, but Wilner said that the state is entitled to give its opinion and that railroads want affected states to support such applications."It is understandable that a company like CSX would want friendly access to the elected representatives," he said. "And for better or worse, the currency of access in this country is through political contributions or gifts that break the congestion at the door."

CSX and some of its executives contributed at least $33,200 to Gilmore's campaign this year, and retired board chairman Hays Watkins gave $63,000. The company and its executives gave Beyer at least $32,000, according to campaign reports. Robert W. Shinn, a CSX vice president in Richmond, defended the post-election vacation. "This was not, "Let's go and send the execs out and play golf kind of trip," Shinn said, "It was truly in the spirit of, "Let's give them a couple days off to relax and let them recharge their batteries." There were no CSX executives and lobbyists out there. It is not unusual for Virginia governors to take a holiday on someone else's dime.

Outgoing Republican Gov. George Allen spent a couple of nights last year at the plus Homestead resort in Hot Springs, Va., courtesy of the resort, a value of $1,152. Allen, who stressed ethics reform as one of his goals in this year's General Assembly, sees no impropriety in accepting free meals, lodging and transportation -- as long as the gifts are disclosed, said spokesman Julie Overy."The cornerstone of reform is disclosure," she said.

Those who lobby for campaign finance restrictions argue that disclosure isn't enough. Twenty states either ban or strictly limit gifts from companies to public officials, and about eight of them apply those laws to political candidates. "Most Americans don't have corporations paying for their vacations," said Ann McBride, president of Common Cause, a government watchdog group. "I've always believed public officials should pay their way like everybody else.... It's just another tool, in addition to campaign contributions, to get access and influence."Metro resource director Margot Williams contributed to the report.
Back

Enclosure B

Reprinted article - The Virginian-Pilot, Thursday October 6, 1994 Metro News
Indictment: Conviction could result in jail time/Beach firm donated $200 to Vincent
By Elizabeth Thiel, Virginian-Pilot Staff Writer

Virginia Beach - Charles W. Vincent, the School Board member indicted on allegations that he sought political contributions from businesses vying for school contracts, faces the loss of his seat , and his freedom, if convicted.

Vincent, 46, the first elected official in the city's history to be indicted on charges of public misconduct, asserted his innocence and blamed his misfortune on being unschooled in the ways of politics. "It's a political minefield out there," he said. "I've always said I was a political novice, But I'm learning, and I'm paying the price for not being knowledgeable in political arenas."

He could get up to nine years in jail and $22,500 in fines if found guilty of all charges of violations of the Virginia Public Procurement Act, said Commonwealth's Attorney Robert J. Humphreys. Conviction of just one of the charges would automatically cost Vincent his seat, although he could stay on the board through any appeals.

Vincent said Wednesday afternoon that he had not yet been notified officially of the charges. Vincent stepped down last week from the building projects committee, but said he does not intend to resign from the board. "I might get killed in the process, but yeah, I'm in it for the count" Vincent said. He said he did not intend to do anything wrong when he asked firms for money. "It never occurred to me that there was a problem," he said.

Last week when the investigation was announced, Vincent said he got an OK before soliciting the funds from a state Board of Elections official whom he did not identify. "You're led by one agency to believe that what you are doing is correct and aboveboard and proper, and then you get hit by another agency with a technicality," he said. "I'm not an attorney."

Dan Brockwell, vice president of Hargrove, Brockwell & Associates Ltd. confirmed that his firm contributed $200 to Vincent's campaign in June. Brockwell said the donation was not intended to sway Vincent's vote. "We've done nothing wrong that I know of," Brockwell said. "We certainly didn't make any contributions with any ideas that it would influence anything. We make contributions to all kinds of campaigns."

Brockwell, his firm and one of his partners also contributed a total of $900 in April to the campaign of James R. Darden, School Board chairman. Darden was once a consultant for the firm but stopped working for them well before he began his term on the board. He has abstained from all votes concerning the firm. Brockwell said he contributes to the campaigns of many candidates who share his views on how the city should be governed, including Mayor Meyera E. Orberndorf.

"We get asked to make contributions to lots of campaigns," he said. "We supported the things that he (Vincent) represented, so we made a contribution to his campaign, just like anyone else, if we were sympathetic with their views." Brockwell attributed Vincent's troubles to inexperience with politics and to heavy debts that plague candidates in all small, local elections. "To my knowledge, the man's done nothing wrong, other than his timing's terrible," Brockwell said.
Back

Enclosure C

Reprinted article - The Virginia Observer, March 14, 1995
Vincent's Plight

Almost each week, Editor and Publisher, a trade magazine for the newspaper industry, reports how a newspaper that lost a case in lower court.... later won on an appeal. That's the American judicial system. You don't lose until the highest court hears the case. Virginia Beach School Board Member Charles Vincent did a very dumb thing. He asked for contributions to pay off his campaign debt from persons who could do business with the school system. But it was no different from what city council members have always done.

Mr. Vincent was found guilty in lower court of a misdemeanor. And he used his American right to appeal his case. In the United States, one is really not proven guilty until the legal process has been exhausted. Just ask Editor and Publisher. For some strange reason, a reporter for the Norfolk Virginian-Pilot does not think Vincent should have all his days in court, and should be removed from office immediately. Perhaps removal may come to pass, but it should not be done until all legal remedies have failed. Any other action would be Un-American.
Back

Reprinted article - The Virginian-Pilot, Tuesday, January 14, 1997
B07 Metro News

EX-SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER'S FINE

Former School Board member Charles W. Vincent was ordered Monday to pay $1,800 in fines stemming from his conviction almost two years ago of misdemeanor ethics violations. Payment of the fine had been delayed until Vincent had exhausted his appeals, according to Commonwealth's Attorney Robert J. Humphreys. The Court of Appeals upheld Vincent's conviction and the Virginia Supreme Court declined to hear the case. Vincent lost his board seat in February 1995 after being convicted of violations for seeking contributions from architectural and engineering firms who were pursuing contracts from the school district. He was raising money to pay back campaign debt. Vincent's attorney argued that such campaign solicitations were common in elections and did not break the law. A jury, however, convicted Vincent of all nine counts and fined him $1,800, $200 for each count. The precedent-setting case marked the first time in the city's history that an elected official was forced from office and the first time in the state that one was prosecuted under that ethics code.

No School Board or other taxpayer funds were used in my legal defense, or any other expenses necessary in defending myself against this politically motivated indictment.

I am not currently running for elective office, and this is not a campaign fundraising appeal. I am, however, adding the disclosure statement, AUTHORIZED BY CHARLES W. VINCENT, anyway. I would not want to, again, be falsely accused of being "willful."

I welcome your comments on this case.

Charles W. Vincent, Ph.D.
2208 East Brook Circle
Virginia Beach, VA 23454
Telephone (757) 427-9032
DADDYV@webtv.net
Authorized by Charles W. Vincent

More Stories

 

No legal advice is given on this Website or Webpage
Send comments to
American Injustice
Copyright © 1997 - 2005 by American Injustice, Inc. All rights reserved
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107,
this material is distributed without profit or payment
to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this
information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.