United States v. Glover

101 F.3d 1183 (7th Cir. 1996)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D was general counsel of a national labor union with over 5,000 members. D was also Fund Manager of the Union's Health and Welfare Fund, as well as a member of its Board of Trustees, and was responsible for managing the Fund's day-to-day operations. D was authorized to make investment decisions concerning the Fund's assets on his own, as such decisions were to be made only under the direction of its full Board of Trustees. Pension Fund investments could only be authorized by a majority vote of its Board. Johnson held the position of Fund Manager of the Pension Fund and served with D as one of its trustees. D was in business for himself and decided to take kickbacks for investments. D sold Fund bonds at a loss of over $195,500 and then invested the proceeds from the sale in a speculative coal-stock without advising the Pension Fund's Board of Trustees of their actions. D and another divided $135,000 as his kickback. D did two more transactions with another broker and divided $30,000. D than did yet another transaction where he shared $556,000 in kickbacks. D then took 36 kickback payments sharing $100,000 from yet another set of transactions. D failed to report the income on his federal income tax returns. D was indicted. At his first trial, D testified in his own defense. The jury declared itself deadlocked, and the judge ordered a mistrial. At his second trial, D elected not to take the stand. P then offered a portion of the transcript of D's testimony from the first trial over D's objection. D claimed Rule 106 required that nearly all of his prior testimony be entered as evidence in the second trial, or, alternatively, that the entire testimony be excluded. The court admitted part of the evidence. D was found guilty and appealed. D asserts that by allowing the jury to receive an incomplete and misleading picture of his prior testimony, the court deprived D of his right to a fair trial.