For more than three decades, Mark Ridley-Thomas was undefeated at the polls, tapping into a well-organized network of supporters to ensure victory after victory.
Now, the former Los Angeles City Council member and county manager is on a different kind of campaign with much bigger stakes: a fight to clear his name and avoid prison.
The 70-year-old was convicted last year of seven counts of corruption stemming from a scheme to get benefits for his son from a USC social worker who sought political support for an LA County business. A judge acquitted him of 12 other charges.
US District Judge Dale S. Fischer sentenced Ridley-Thomas in August 2023 to 42 months in prison. The veteran law enforcement officer was released on bail while pushing to have the jury's decision reversed by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
On Thursday, Ridley-Thomas's quest for clemency reaches a critical stage, with oral arguments scheduled for a three-judge panel at the Pasadena Court of Appeals.
Ridley-Thomas and his followers came to his defense with the strength and strategy of a political movement.
She continued to make public appearances, posing for photos with supporters and allies including LA Mayor Karen Bass. Multiple emails keep supporters informed of legislative developments, with invitations to “RSVP” for hearings. “Our presence is our voice,” said another note asking students to fill the courtroom for Ridley-Thomas' sentencing.
Ridley-Thomas also turned to supporters for financial help, writing in an April email, “We must be ready to change this injustice.” He asked for donations of $250 “whatever you feel comfortable giving.”
Read more: Mark Ridley-Thomas is appealing for immunity while he appeals a corruption conviction
More than $100,000 flowed into his legal defense fund in the first half of 2024, according to a public filing.
Among his donors are familiar names in LA public life: $1,000 each from lobbyist Arnie Berghoff, public affairs consultant Kerman Maddox, broadcaster Tavis Smiley and prominent attorney Patricia Glaser. Fabian Nunez, the former speaker of the state Legislature, came in at $2,500, according to the filing. A number of Ridley-Thomas' assistants also contributed, including former Times reporter and now Capital & Main Editor in Chief Peter Hong for $200. Evitarus, a public opinion research firm, gave $5,000, according to the filing.
“I contributed to the defense fund as a former employee of Mr. Ridley-Thomas,” Hong said. “In our legal system we have the right to defend ourselves. And in our system, we are expected to pay for that defense. That can be very expensive.”
Supporters held prayer services, and in January, longtime assistant Vincent Harris began a “teaching” where he and several attorneys went over, in their view, the flaws in the prosecution's case.
Read more: Mark Ridley-Thomas was found guilty of corruption
In a lecture, Areva Martin, attorney and analyst, introduced the legal team handling the Ridley-Thomas appeal, appointing UC Berkeley Law School Dean Erwin Chemerinsky and Paul Watford, a former 9th Circuit judge who is now in private practice. Ridley-Thomas' appeal marks Watford's first appearance in front of his former team-mates since he left the bench in 2023.
“Don't think he hasn't been asked by many defendants to answer their pleas,” Martin said during the lecture. “The fact that he decided to take this case speaks volumes about what he thought about the way this case was handled at the trial level.”
“This case is unlike any other,” said Alyssa Bell, a former public defender who leads the appeals team. “Our job is to re-learn the narrative, to re-tell the story of Dr. and the theory of persecution which is the first of its kind.”
For much of the past year, prosecutors and the defense have been trading arguments in court to present Thursday before a three-judge panel. The defense attorney said prosecutors have developed a “novel” theory of honest services fraud built on the idea that what Ridley-Thomas received from her dealings with the USC administrator was to protect her “public image” and “family brand.” The pastor, Marilyn Flynn, was sentenced to 18 months under house arrest after pleading guilty to one count of bribery.
Honest services fraud does not extend to quid pro quo transactions where the “quid” is considered a reputational gain, defense attorneys argued in the filing. They argued that such prosecutions, if allowed to stand, would criminalize the normal interaction between elected officials and voters.
Read more: In a city rocked by corruption, Ridley-Thomas's conviction brings community contributions, not contempt.
But prosecutors said they pointed out to jurors certain items of value in the alleged bribery scheme Ridley-Thomas sought to get from USC: her son Sebastian's admission, a scholarship to pay for Sebastian's tuition, Sebastian's teaching job and a $100,000 donation from USC. USC to a nonprofit run by Sebastian, prosecutors wrote.
“The benefit of reputation was just one of the defendant's motives in seeking and seeking the benefits of his son,” prosecutors wrote, calling it “ancient” corruption.
Both prosecutors and defense attorneys had filed their statements before the 9th Circuit in June when the US Supreme Court issued a potentially disruptive decision. By a 6-3 vote, a majority of conservatives overturned the conviction of a former Indiana mayor who took a $13,000 payment from a trucking company that had won $1.1 million in city contracts.
In a decision written by Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, the court found that officials can be prosecuted for bribery but not for accepting past benefits if there is no evidence of an illegal agreement.
Ridley-Thomas' lawyers have already accused prosecutors of conspiring to bribe and kickbacks. The Supreme Court's decision “makes it clear” that the government's view of the case is “legally invalid in all cases,” they argued.
Prosecutors again dismissed the filing last month, saying their case is consistent with the Supreme Court's decision because evidence shows a clear agreement between Ridley-Thomas and the USC dean, including a confidential letter memorializing the agreement that the pastor. it was hand delivered to a politician's office in downtown LA.
In addition, prosecutors accused Ridley-Thomas and his defense of cherry-picking evidence to fit a favorable, if inaccurate, view.
“As he has done in his opening and answering briefs, the defendant presents a factual account that is separate from the trial record,” prosecutors wrote.
Subscribe to Essential California to get news, features and recommendations from the LA Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
This story first appeared in the Los Angeles Times.
Source link
