Federal prosecutors and the attorneys representing the former head of Jamaica Hospital’s parent company are now waiting for a judge to determine the administrator’s fate in his bribery and corruption trial.
Both sides gave their final arguments in Manhattan federal court Friday in David Rosen’s bench case in which he has been accused of illegally paying off and hiring several state legislators, including the late state Assemblyman Anthony Seminerio, in return for favorable legislation for Jamaica Hospital.
The prosecutors contended that the evidence against Rosen, who used to be the chief executive officer of MediSys, which runs Jamaica, Flushing and Peninsula hospitals, showed a clear example of corruption.
“Sophisticated men commit sophisticated crimes,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Bosworth said during his long summation. “[Rosen] was particularly sophisticated when it came to politics. That’s how he was able to build a health care empire.”
Rosen has been accused of paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to Seminerio; Assemblyman William Boyland (D-Brooklyn), a former MediSys employee; and state Sen. Karl Kruger (D-Brooklyn) from 2001 to the time of his arrest. He allegedly paid Seminerio $390,000 for favorable legislation that would support Jamaica Hospital, according to prosecutors.
Boyland and Kruger are awaiting their own corruption trials in the court.
Seminerio died in federal prison earlier this year after he pleaded guilty to setting up a consulting firm that was used to take money for his corrupt hospital deeds.
Bosworth reminded Judge Jed Rakoff that Rosen never told the FBI that he hired Seminerio as a paid consultant when they questioned him during the investigation into the elected officials.
But Scott Morvillo, Rosen’s lawyer, countered that the U.S. attorney’s office does not have a clear-cut case. Morvillo played up Rosen’s 40 years of experience in the Queens health care system and said that his dealings with the elected officials was not illegal in any shape or form.
“There is no proof on the record that comes close to establishing that,” he told Rakoff. “It’s totally circumstantial evidence.”
The judge did not deliver his verdict following the summations and as of press time Tuesday afternoon, no decision had been made. The court indicated that he might submit a written verdict at a later date.
Reach reporter Ivan Pereira by e-mail at ipereira@c
©2011 Community News Group
By submitting this comment, you agree to the following terms:
You agree that you, and not TimesLedger.com or its affiliates, are fully responsible for the content that you post. You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening or sexually-oriented material or any material that may violate applicable law; doing so may lead to the removal of your post and to your being permanently banned from posting to the site. You grant to TimesLedger.com the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part world-wide and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.