Former Allentown Mayor Ed Pawlowski's appeal just regurgitates the same arguments
We all expected former Allentown Mayor Ed Pawlowski to ask the judge to reverse his corruption conviction. I was expecting him to make better arguments, though. He’s relying on the same stale ones that failed during his trial.
A federal jury convicted Pawlowski in March of 47 felonies related to pay-to-play politics, providing favors in exchange for campaign donations. His attorney, Jack McMahon, said that night that the verdict would be challenged.
The challenge came April 20 in a “motion for judgment of acquittal” that argues the jury got it wrong because there was no clear evidence of any quid pro quo. The six-page document regurgitates the same arguments the jury didn’t buy in court, that there was no direct connection between payments to the mayor’s campaign and any actions taken by the city.
Our justice system calls on juries to weigh conflicting testimony and evidence and render a verdict. This jury did that. Asking a judge to now rule that there was insufficient evidence to support the charges seems to be a waste of time, not to mention insulting to the jurors who devoted six weeks of their lives to the trial.
Read more: http://www.mcall.com/opinion/muschick/mc-opi-ed-pawlowski-conviction-amazon-proposals-appeals-muschick-20180427-story.html