By FRED SHUSTER
A federal appellate panel in Pasadena heard arguments Thursday but made no ruling in former Los Angeles County politician Mark Ridley-Thomas’ bid to overturn his fraud and bribery convictions for scheming to obtain benefits for his son from a USC social work dean.
In arguments before the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, a lawyer for Ridley-Thomas asserted that guilty verdicts for bribery and honest services fraud should not be allowed to stand.
Ridley-Thomas, 70, was sentenced to three years and six months in federal prison for his March 2023 convictions on single counts of conspiracy, bribery and honest services mail fraud and four counts of honest services wire fraud. The Los Angeles federal jury acquitted him of a dozen fraud counts. U.S. District Judge Dale S. Fischer subsequently granted the longtime politician’s bid for bail pending appeal.
Ridley-Thomas was a suspended member of the LA City Council at the time he was convicted.
The jury found that Ridley-Thomas engaged in a criminal conspiracy with Marilyn Flynn, 85, former dean of USC’s School of Social Work and a tenured professor. Flynn, who pleaded guilty to bribing Ridley-Thomas, was sentenced in July 2023 to 18 months home confinement and ordered to pay a $150,000 fine.
Evidence showed that Flynn provided Ridley-Thomas and his son benefits, including graduate school admission to pursue a dual master’s degree, a full-tuition scholarship, a paid professorship and a way for Ridley-Thomas to transfer $100,000 of his campaign funds through the university to a nonprofit — Policy, Research & Practice Initiative — to be run by the politician’s son.
In exchange, prosecutors said, Ridley-Thomas supported contracts involving the social work school, including contracts to provide services to the Department of Children and Family Services and the Probation Department, as well as an amendment to a contract with the Department of Mental Health that could help bring the school potentially millions of dollars in new revenue.
By secretly “funneling” the money through USC, Ridley-Thomas and Flynn attempted to disguise the true source of the $100,000 payment to make it appear as though USC, not Ridley-Thomas, was the benefactor supporting Ridley-Thomas’ son and the Policy, Research & Practice Initiative. Defense attorneys said the defendant wanted his money transferred this way in order to avoid negative publicity stemming from the appearance of nepotism.
In arguing for a reversal of the bribery and fraud counts, appellate attorney Alyssa Bell asserted there was no evidence of a “quid pro quo” arrangement between Ridley-Thomas and Flynn. The attorney criticized as “unprecedented” the prosecution’s theory that Flynn’s assistance in transferring the money to the Policy, Research & Practice Initiative was a “thing of value” that serves as a basis for bribery.
“As a matter of law, the so-called funneling cannot serve as a predicate for any of Ridley-Thomas’ convictions,” Bell stated before the three-judge panel Thursday. “Flynn’s assistance did not personally enrich Ridley-Thomas, and personal enrichment is the hallmark of traditional bribery. Rather, Flynn helped Ridley-Thomas to make his donation, which complied fully with state campaign finance laws and public disclosure requirements.”
In her opposing argument, Assistant U.S. Attorney Lindsey Greer Dotson said the $100,000 payment itself is the “thing of value” at the heart of the bribery conviction.
“The fact is, there was a payment, and a payment is a thing of value,” she said, adding that the assistance of Flynn was essential to “getting that check issued” to the Policy, Research & Practice Initiative.
In its appellate brief, lawyers for Ridley-Thomas also argued that the process of selecting jurors for the trial was flawed because government attorneys allegedly acted in a discriminatory manner by using two peremptory strikes to eliminate all Black women from the jury.
The defense also insists there was no showing that Ridley-Thomas performed “an official act” while on the Board of Supervisors in favor of an expansion of a telehealth contract with the county Department of Mental Health.
A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office declined comment.
Related Articles
LA City Council makes a statement on freedom of speech and religion — and promoting peace
$2.14 billion LAPD spending plan under review, seeks public comment
2024 election results: Adrin Nazarian, Heather Hutt express confidence in LA City Council races
Incoming DA Nathan Hochman names Steve Katz as chief deputy
No prison time for this Jose Huizar aide in LA City Hall pay-to-play scheme
Federal prosecutors based their case on a long string of emails and letters they say showed that Ridley-Thomas “used his publicly provided privileges to monetize his elected office and demand benefits for his son,” according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
Ridley-Thomas served on the L.A. City Council from 1991-2002, then was a member of the Assembly and state Senate before being elected to the powerful county Board of Supervisors in 2008, serving until 2020. He then returned to the City Council until he was suspended by his council colleagues in October 2021 and permanently removed following his conviction.
“The entire community has been victimized by the defendant’s crimes,” Fischer said during the sentencing hearing, adding that Ridley-Thomas “has committed serious crimes, has not accepted responsibility and has shown no remorse.”