In the corruption prosecution case of Senator Bob Menendez, his co-defendants’ attorneys argued that the charges against them were based on guilt by association. Lawrence Lustberg, representing Wael Hana, stated that the case criminalized friendships, gift giving, and business success. The defense emphasized that Hana and Nadine Menendez shared a close, supportive relationship, exchanging gifts and helping each other in times of need. They urged the jury to remain impartial and consider cultural norms regarding gift giving, especially in the Middle East.
The defense refuted allegations of bribery, pointing out instances where Hana declined requests for additional financial assistance from Nadine Menendez. They argued that loans were given, not bribes, and were repaid accordingly. Lustberg emphasized that Hana secured contracts based on his own merit and professional credentials, rather than any undue influence from Menendez. Cesar De Castro, representing Fred Daibes, echoed similar sentiments, emphasizing the importance of longstanding friendships and legitimate investments over corruption allegations.
The case involves all three alleged conspirators pleading not guilty, with co-defendant Jose Uribe agreeing to testify against the other defendants after pleading guilty. Nadine Menendez, who is also charged, has pleaded not guilty and is facing a delayed trial due to health reasons. The trial may last between 6-8 weeks. This is the second time Menendez has been accused in a federal corruption case, with the most recent charges involving an alleged bribery scheme involving the governments of Egypt and Qatar.
The defense argued that the exchange of gold bars and cash were innocent gestures, not bribery, pointing to Daibes’ generosity and philanthropic nature. They emphasized the presumption of innocence for their clients and urged the jury to consider the evidence with an open mind. The defense lawyers sought to portray their clients as individuals who maintained legitimate relationships and conducted business based on their own merits, rather than through corrupt means.
Despite the allegations and ongoing trial, the defense lawyers for Hana and Daibes remained steadfast in their defense of their clients, highlighting their personal relationships with the Menendez family and their own professional credentials. The case is expected to last several weeks, with the potential for further revelations and testimonies. The defense attorneys emphasized the importance of impartiality and called on the jury to carefully consider the evidence presented in the trial. Ultimately, the outcome of the case will depend on the jury’s assessment of the evidence and the credibility of the witnesses.
