Siegelman Indictment
FILED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR MIDDLE DISTRICT OF
NORTHERN DIVISION
)
v. ) CRIMINAL NO. 2:05-CR-119-F
)
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN, )
PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK )
GARY MACK ROBERTS, and )
RICHARD M. SCRUSHY. ) SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT
THE GRAND JURY CHARGES:
INTRODUCTION
1. At all times material to this Indictment:
a. The State of
for an Executive Department, headed by the Governor of the State of
Supreme Executive, and by a Lieutenant Governor.
b. The Executive Department of the State of
government agencies, including the Alabama Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, the
Contractors , the Alabama Department of Environmental Management, the
Department of Finance, the Alabama Department of Transportation, the
Department of Revenue, the Alabama Department of Economic and Community Affairs,
the Alabama Development Office, and other
authorities.
c. DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN was, from on or about
Lieutenant Governor was also, from on or about
1999, to on or about
d. PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK was, from on or about
was, from on or about
to the Governor of the State of
e. GARY MACK ROBERTS was, from on or about
or about
Department of Transportation.
f. RICHARD M. SCRUSHY was the Chainnan and Chief Executive Officer of
HealthSouth Corporation (hereafter sometimes "HealthSouth"), a business selling
medical products and services in the State of
regulated by the State of Alabama Certificate of Need Review Board (hereafter
sometimes "CON Board").
COUNT ONE
(RICO Conspiracy, 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d))
2. The Grand Jury realleges and incorporates Paragraph I of this Indictment as though
fully set forth in this Count.
The
3. At all times relevant to this Indictment, the Executive Department of the State of
1961(4) (hereafter sometimes "the enterprise"), which was engaged in, and the activities
of which affected, Interstate and foreign commerce, and the enterprise constituted an ongoing
organization, whose members functioned as a continuing unit a common purpose of
achieving the objectives of the enterprise.
The Racketeering Conspiracy
4. From in or about August 1997, to on or about
District of Alabama and elsewhere, the defendants
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and
PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK,
together with Nicholas D. Bailey, Clayton "Lanny" Young, and other persons known and
unknown to the Grand Jury, being persons employed by and associated with the
enterprise, which engaged in, and the activities of which affected, interstate and foreign
commerce, knowingly, and intentionally conspired to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c), that
is, to conduct and participate, directly and indirectly, in the conduct of the affairs of that
enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, as that term is defined in Sections
1961(1) and 1961(5) of Title 18, United States Code, consisting of multiple acts
indictable under the following provisions of federal law:
a. 18 U.S.C. § 2, 1341, 1343, and 1346 (Honest Services Fraud);
b. 18 U.S.C. § 2, 1951 (Extortion);
c. 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (Money Laundering);
d. 18 U.S.C. § 2, 1512 (Obstruction of Justice);
and multiple acts involving bribery in violation of ALA. CODE 1975 § 13A-10-61 &
ALA. CODE 1975 § I 7-22A-7. It was a further part of the conspiracy that each
defendant agreed that a conspirator would commit at least two acts of racketeering
activity in the conduct of the affairs of the enterprise.
Purpose of the Conspiracy
5. The purpose of the racketeering activity was:
a. to give or withhold official governmental acts and influence, and to threaten to give
and withhold official governmental acts and influence, in exchange for money and
property to which the participants in the conspiracy were not entitled;
b. to deprive the State of
and employees in exchange for money and property; and
c. to conceal and otherwise protect the conspiracy and its participants from detection and
prosecution.
Manner and Means of the Conspiracy
6. It was a part of the conspiracy that defendants DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and
PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK, as well as other co-conspirators known and unknown to
the Grand Jury, engaged in a scheme to defraud and deprive the State of
right to the honest services of DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and PAUL MICHAEL
HAMRICK in their capacity as state officials and employees, and of other state officials
and employees, as more fully described in Count Two.
7. It was a part of the conspiracy that defendants DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and
PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK, as well as other co-conspirators known and unknown to
the Grand Jury, engaged in bribery and extortion under color of official right, as more
fully described in Count Two.
8. It was a part of the conspiracy that defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN as well as
co-conspirators known and unknown to the Grand Jury, engaged in money laundering by
financial transactions concealing the proceeds of unlawful activity, as more fully
described in Count Two.
9. It was a part of the conspiracy that defendants DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and
PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK, as well as co-conspirators known and unknown to the Grand
Jury, attempted to obstruct justice by corruptly persuading others, and engaging in
misleading conduct toward others, to hinder, delay, and prevent the communication to
law enforcement officers of the
and possible commission of a federal offense, as more fully described in Count Two.
10. It was also part of the conspiracy that defendants DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN,
PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK, and co-conspirators known and unknown to the Grand
Jury would and did knowingly give and withhold, and threaten to give and withhold,
official action and influence to benefit the personal and financial interests of themselves and others not entitled to such benefits.
All done in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1962(d).
COUNT TWO
(RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c))
11. The Grand Jury realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1-5 of this Indictment as
though fully set forth in this Count.
The Racketeering Violation
12. From in or about August 1997, to on or about
District of Alabama and elsewhere, defendants DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and PAUL
MICHAEL HAMRICK, and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, being
employed by
and associated with the enterprise, which was engaged in and the activities of which
affected interstate and foreign commerce, unlawfully and cnowing1y conducted and
participated, directly and indirectly, in the conduct of the affairs of the enterprise through
a pattern of racketeering activity, as set forth in Paragraphs 13-47 below.
Pattern of Racketeering Activity
13. The pattern of racketeering activity, as that term is defined in Sections 1961(1) and
1961(5) of Title 18, United States Code, consisted of the following acts.
Racketeering Act I
14. Defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN committed the following acts, any one of which alone constitutes the commission of Racketeering Act 1:
Racketeering Act 1(a)
(Extortion under Color of Official Right,
18 U.S.C. § 1951)
15. From on or about
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN
aided and abetted by others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, did knowingly
obstruct, delay, affect and attempt to obstruct, delay and affect commerce and the
movement of articles and commodities in commerce by extortion, as those terms are
defined in Title 18, United States Code, Section 1951; that is, defendant DON EUGENE
SIEGELMAN, unlawfully obtained $500,000 from and at the direction of Richard M.
Scrushy, with consent, under color of official right, in return for official action and
influence to afford HealthSouth official membership on, representation at, and influence
over, the CON Board, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951.
Racketeering Act I (b)
(Bribery, ALA. CODE 1975 § 13A-1O-61(a)(2))
16. From on or about
District of
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN
while a public-servant solicited, accepted, and agreed to accept a p benefit upon an
agreement and understanding that his vote, opinion, judgment, exercise of discretion, and
other action as a public servant would thereby be corruptly influenced, to wit defendant
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN, while the Governor-elect of the State of
while Governor of the State of
$500,000 from and at the direction of Richard M. Scrushy upon an agreement and
understanding that defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN would give official action
and influence to afford HealthSouth official membership on, representation at, and
influence over the CON Board, all in violation of ALA. CODE 1975 § I 3A- 10-61 (a)(2).
Racketeering Acts I (c)-(e)
(Honest Services Mail Fraud,
18 U.S.C. § 2, 1341, & 1346)
The Scheme
17. From on or about
20, 2003, in the Middle District of Alabama and elsewhere, defendant
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN,
aided and abetted by Richard M. Scrushy and others known and unknown to the Grand
Jury, knowingly and willfu]]y devised and intended to devise a scheme and artifice to
defraud and
deprive the State of
as Governor of the State of
enrichment, self-dealing, and conflict of interest concerning the CON Board.
Purpose off the Scheme
18. It was the purpose of the scheme for DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN, Richard M
. Scrushy, and others to give HealthSouth official membership on, representation at, and
influence over the CON Board by means of hidden payments and financial relationships,
and to conceal these activities.
Manner and Means of the Scheme
19. It was part of the scheme and artifice to defraud that:
a. Richard M. Scrushy would and did pay $500,000 to DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN in
two disguised and concealed payments of $250,000.
b. DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN would and did appoint Richard M. Scrushy to the CON
Board.
c. Richard M. Scrushy would and did take a seat on the CON Board.
d. Richard M. Scrushy would and did use his seat on the CON Board to attempt to affect
the interests of HealthSouth and its competitors.
e. Richard M. Scrushy and DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN would and did orchestrate
Richard M. Scrushy's replacement on the CON Board by another person employed by
HealthSouth.
Execution of the Scheme
20. On or about each date listed below in the Middle District of Alabama and elsewhere,
defendant DON EUGENE STEGELMAN, aided and abetted by Richard M. Scrushy and
others known and unknown to the Grand Ju for the purpose of executing and attempting
to execute the above-described scheme and artifice defraud and deprive, placed and
caused to be placed in a post office and an authorized depository for mail, to be sent and
delivered by the United States Postal Service, and to be sent and delivered by a private
and commercial interstate carrier, the following matters and things:
| Act | Date | Description |
| 1(c) | | Letter of Appointment of Richard M. Scrushy to the Alabama CON Board, mailed from |
| 1(d) | | Letter of Appointment of a member of the CON Board employed by HealthSouth, mailed from |
all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2, 1341, & 1346.
Racketeering Act I (e)
(Honest Services Wire Fraud,
18 U.S.C. § 2, 1343, & 1346)
21. The Grand Jury realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 17-19 of this Indictment,
describing the Scheme, the Purpose of the Scheme, and the Manner and Means of the
Scheme, as though fully set forth in this Racketeering Act.
Execution of the Scheme
22. On or about the date of the Racketeering Act listed below, in the Middle District of
others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, for the purpose of executing the above-
described scheme
and artifice to defraud, and deprive, transmitted and caused to be transmitted by means of
wire communication in interstate commerce, the follof ing writings, signals and sounds:
| Act | Date | Description |
| 1(e) | | Facsimile transmission from -iealthSouth in |
All in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§2, 1343, &1346.
Racketeering Act 1(f)
(Money Laundering,
18 U.S.C. §* 2 & 1956(a)(1)(B)(i))
23. On or about
elsewhere, the defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN, aided and abetted by others
known and unknown to the Grand Jury, did knowingly conduct and attempt to conduct a
financial transaction, such transaction involving the use of a financial institution which is
engaged in, and the activities of which affect, interstate commerce, to wit: defendant
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN caused the deposit of a check, made payable to the
Alabama Education Lottery Foundation and drawn on the account of a business in the
amount of $250,000, to account number 59468 in the name of the
Alabama Education Foundation, at First Commercial Bank,
transaction involving the proceeds of a specified unlawful activity, that is violation of 18
U.S.C. § 666, 1341, 1343, 1346, and 1951, and an act involving bribery in violation of
ALA. CODE 1975 § 13A-lO-61, knowing that the transaction was designed in whole and in part to conceal
and disguise the nature, location, source, ownership, and control of the proceeds of said
specified unlawful activity, and that while conducting and attempting to conduct such financial
transaction knew that the property involved in the financial transaction represented the
proceeds of some form
of unlawful activity, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2 & 1956(a)(1)(B)(i).
Racketeering Act 1(g)
(Money thundering,
18 U.S.C. § 2 & 1956(a)(1)(B)(i))
24. On or about
defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN, aided and abetted by others known and
unknown to the Grand Jury, did knowingly conduct and attempt o conduct a financial
transaction, such transaction involving the use of a financial institution which is engaged
in, and the activities of which affect, interstate commerce, to wit: defendant DON
EUGENE SIEGELMAN caused the deposit of a check, made payable to the
Education Foundation and drawn on the account of HealthSouth, in the amount of
$250,000 to an outstanding loan account in the name of the Alabama Education
Foundation, at First Commercial Bank,
proceeds of a specified unlawful activity, that is violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666, 1341, 1343,
1346, 1951, and ALA. CODE 1975 § 13A-l0-61,knowing that the transaction was
designed in whole and in part to conceal and disguise the nature, location, source,
ownership, and control of the proceeds of said specified unlawful activity, and that while
conducting and attempting to conduct such financial transaction knew that the property
involved in the financial transaction represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful
activity, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2 & 1956(a)(l)(B)(i).
Racketeering Act 2
25. The defendants named below committed the following acts, any one of which alone
constitutes the commission of Racketeering Act 2.
Racketeering Act 2(a)
(Conspiracy to Commit Extortion under Color of Official Right,
18 U.S.C § 1951)
26. From on or about
of
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN,
did knowingly conspire to obstruct, delay, affect commerce and the movement of articles
and commodities in commerce by extortion, as those terms are defined in Title 18,
United States Code, Section 1951; that is, defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN,
unlawfully conspired to obtain money from Clayton "Lanny" Young and a business
represented by Clayton "Lanny" Young, with consent, under color of official right, in
exchange for official action and influence to advance the financial interests of that
business as to waste disposal fees and taxes at a facility at
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951.
Racketeering Act 2(b)
(Bribery, ALA. CODE 1975 § 13A-lO-61(a)(2))
27. Between on or about
Middle District of
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN,
while a public servant, did solicit, accept, and agree to accept pecuniary benefits upon an
agreement and understanding that his vote, opinion, judgment, exercise of discretion, and
other action as a public servant would thereby be corruptly influenced, to wit, defendant
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN, while Governor of the State of
elected Governor of the Slate of Alabama, solicited, accepted, and agreed to accept a
pecuniary benefit,
to-wit: money, in return for being influenced in the performance of official acts
concerning waste disposal fees and taxes at a facility at Emelle, A in favor of a business
represented by Clayton "Lanny" Young, all in violation of ALA. CODE 1975 § 13A-l0-
61(a)(2).
Racketeering Acts 2(c)-(o)
(Honest Services Mail Fraud,
I8 U.S.C._§ 1341,& 1346)
The Scheme
28. From in or about August 1997, to on or about
of
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and
PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK,,
aided and abetted by each other, by Clayton "Lanny" Young, by Nicholas D. Bailey, and
by others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, knowingly and willfully devised and
intended to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud and deprive the State of
its right to the honest and faithful services of themselves as public officials and
employees of the State of
enrichment, self-dealing, and conflict of interest, concerning alcoholic beverage and
waste disposal regulation, the assessment and collection of hazardous waste fees and
taxes, allocation of municipal bond funding, and state construction contracting.
Purpose of the Scheme
29. It was the purpose of the scheme for DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and PAUL
MICHAEL HAMRICK to use their positions in the Executive Department of the State of
official
power, actions, and influence, concerning the business and financial interests of Clayton
"Lanny" Young and persons represented by Clayton "Lanny" Young, and thus enriching
Clayton "Lanny" Young so that they would have continued access to his money,
property, and other things of value.
Manner and Means of the Scheme
30. It was part of the scheme and artifice to defraud that:
a. Defendants DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK
engaged in a course of conduct with Clayton "Lanny" Young establishing an agreement
and understanding by which Clayton "Lanny" Young could obtain official acts in
exchange for money, property, and other things of value.
b. Clayton "Lanny" Young would and did give valuable private airplane transportation to
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK.
c. Clayton "Lanny" Young would and did give, directly and indirectly, valuable property
to DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN including a Polaris Magnum 325 4X4 All Terrain
Vehicle and other items worth approximately $23,000.
d. Clayton "Lanny" Young would and did give, directly and indirectly, approximately
$204,200 to DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN.
e. Clayton "Lanny" Young would and did give, directly and indirectly, approximately
$20,000 to Nicholas D. Bailey.
f. Clayton "Lanny" Young would and did give, directly and indirectly, approximately
$46,000 to PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK.
g. DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK would and did
assist Clayton "Lanny" Young and endeavor to enrich him and enable him to provide
them with money and property through their official power, and influence, including the
following acts on or about the following dates:
| Date | Descripti, on |
| Between | Influencing passage of legislation allowing sale of alcoholic beverages each day of the week, including Sunday, at a motor speedway |
| Between | Influencing the Cherokee County Commission in favor of Clayton “Lanny” Young’s business interests |
| Between | Influencing a waste disposal business represented by Clayton “Lanny” Young to continue paying for his services, and influencing regulation of waste disposal fees and taxes at a facility at |
| Between | Influencing the de facto Director of the Alabama Development Office to advance a business represented by Clayton “Lanny” Young on the list of the companies eligible for industrial tax-free bond issues. |
| Between | Influencing the award of a construction management contract to a company controlled by Clayton “Lanny” Young to build warehouses for the Alabama Department of Economic and community Affairs and the State of |
h. DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN would and did solicit and obtain money and property
from businesses that benefitted from official action taken by DON EUGENE
SIEGELMAN and PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK for Clayton "Lanny" Young.
Execution of the Scheme
31. On or about the date of each Racketeering Act listed below, in the Middle District of
MICHAEL HAMR1CK, aided and abetted by each other and others known and unknown
to the Grand Jury, for the purpose of executing and attempting to execute the above-
described scheme and artifice to defraud and deprive, placed and caused to be placed in a
post office and an authorized depository
for mail, to be sent and delivered by the United States Postal Service, and to be sent and
delivered by a private and commercial interstate carrier, the following matters and things:
| Act | Date | Description |
| 2(c) | | Letter concerning $1 ,000,000 payment to Clayton “Lanny” Young for reduction of fees at |
| 2(d) | | Hazardous Waste Fee Report mailed from a facility in |
| 2(e) | | Hazardous Waste Fee Report mailed from a facility in |
| 2(f) | | Hazardous Waste Fee Report mailed from a facility in |
| 2(g) | | Hazardous Waste Fee Report mailed from a facility in |
all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2, 1341, & 1346.
Racketeering Acts 2(h)-(o)
(Honest Services Wire Fraud,
18 U.S.C. § 1346)
32. The Grand Jury realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 28-30 of this Indictment,
describing the Scheme, the Purpose of the Scheme, and the Manner and Means of the
Scheme, as though fully set forth in this Racketeering Act.
Execution of the Scheme
33. On or about the date of each Racketeering Act listed below, in the MiddI District of
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and
PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK,
aided and abetted by each other and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, for
the purpose
Of executing the above-described scheme and artifice to defraud and debrive, transmitted
and caused to be transmitted by means of wire communication in interstate commerce,
the following writings, signals and sounds:
| Act | Date | Description |
| 2(h) | | Wire transfer of $l,000,000 from |
| 2(i) | | Wire transfer of $2,000,000 from |
| 2(j) | | Facsimile transmission of DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN’s resume from |
| 2(k) | | Facsimile transmission from |
| 2(l) | | Facsimile transmission from |
| 2(m) | | Facsimile transmission from an insurance company in |
| 2(n) | | Facsimile transmission from |
| 2(o) | | Facsimile transmission from |
all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2, 1343, & 1346.
Racketeering Act 3
(Obstruction of Justice,
18 U.S.C. § 151 2(b)(3))
34. On or about
PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK,
did knowingly corruptly persuade and attempt to knowingly corruptly persuade another
person, and did engage in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to
hinder, delay, and prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer of the United
States of information relating to the commission of a federal offense and a possible
commission of a federal offense, to wit, defendant PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK did
give a check in the amount of $3,000 to Clayton "Lanny" Young with intent to hinder,
delay, and prevent communication to the Federal Bureau of Investigation by Clayton
“Lanny” Young of information concerning federal offenses related to $6,000 that
Clayton “Lanny” Young gave to PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK on
Racketeering Act 4
35. The defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN committed the following acts, any one
of which alone constitutes the commission of Racketeering Act 4.
Racketeering Act 4(a)
(Obstruction of Justice,
18 U.S.C. § 2 & 1512(b)(3))
36. On or about
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN,
aided and abetted by others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, did knowingly
corruptly persuade and attempt to knowingly corruptly persuade another person, and did
engage in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to hinder, delay, and
prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer of the
information relating to the commission of a federal offense and a possible commission of
a federal offense, to wit, defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN did cause Nicholas D.
Bailey to write a check in the amount of
$10,503.39 to Clayton "Lanny" Young with the notation "repayment of loan plus
mterest" with intent to hinder, delay, and prevent communication to the Federal Bureau
of Investigation by Clayton "Lanny" Young and Nicholas D. Bailey of information
concerning federal offenses related to $9,200 that Clayton "Lanny" Young gave to DON
EUGENE SIEGELMAN on
1512(b)(3).
Racketeering Act 4(b)
(Obstruction of Justice,
18 U.S.C. § 2 & 1512(b)(3))
37. On or about
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN,
aided and abetted by others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, did knowingly
corruptly persuade and attempt to knowingly corruptly persuade another person, and did
engage in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to hinder, delay, and
prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer of the
information relating to the commission of a federal offense and a possible commission of
a federal offense, to wit, defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN did cause Nicholas D.
Bailey to provide him with a check in the amount of $2,973.35 with the notation "balance
due on m/c” with intent to hinder, delay, and prevent communication to the Federal
Bureau of Investigation by Clayton "Lanny" Young and Nicholas D. Bailey, and by
counsel for Nicholas D. Bailey, of information concerning federal offenses related to
$9,200 that Clayton "Lanny" Young gave to DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN on January
20, 2000, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2 & 151 2(b)(3).
Racketeering Act 5
38. Defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN committed the following acts, any one of
which alone constitutes the commission of Racketeering Act 5:
Racketeering Act 5(a)
(Extortion under Color of Official Right and
by Fear of Economic Harm, 18 U.S.C. § 1951)
39. From on or about
District of
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN
did knowingly obstruct, delay, affect, and attempt to obstruct, delay, and affect, '
commerce and the movement of articles and commodities in commerce by extortion, as
those terms are defined in Title 18, United States Code, Section 1951; that is, defendant
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN, while Lieutenant Governor and a candidate for Governor
of the State of
Jimmy Lynn Allen, with Jimmy Lynn Allen's consent, induced by wrongful use of fear
of economic harm and under color of official right in that defendant DON EUGENE
SIEGELMAN demanded $100,000 and accepted $40,000 from Jimmy Lynn Allen upon
a threat to use official action and official influence as the Governor of the State of
Alabama Department of Transportation if Jimmy Lynn Allen did not consent to pay, and
upon a promise to use official action and official influence as the Governor of the State of
Department of Transportation if Jimmy Lynn Allen did consent to pay, all in violation of
18 U.S.C. § 1951.
Racketeering Act 5(b)
(Fair Campaign Practices Act Bribery,
ALA. CODE 19175 § I 7-22A-7(c))
40. From on or about October 15, 1 9 to on or about
District of
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN
while a candidate for Governor of the State of
accept, and received contributions upon an agreement and understanding that his vote,
opinion, judgment, exercise of discretion, and other action as a public servant would
thereby be corruptly influenced and for the intention of corruptly influencing his official
actions, to wit, defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN, as a candidate for Governor of
the State of
$40,000 from Jimmy Lynn Allen upon a promise to use official action and official
influence as the Governor of the State of
business interests involving the Alabama Department of Transportation, all in violation of
ALA. CODE 1975 § 17-22A-7(c).
Racketeering Act 5(c)
(Extortion under Color of Official Right and
by Fear of Economic Harm, 18 U.S.C. § 1951)
41. In or about September 2002, in the Middle District of Alabama and elsewhere,
defendant
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN
while the Governor of the State of
attempt to obstruct, delay, and affect, commerce and the movement of articles and
commodities in commerce by extortion, as those terms are defined in Title 18, United
States Code, Section 1951; that is,
defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN, unlawfully demanded $250,000 from Forrest
"Mac" Marcato, induced by wrongful use of fear of economic harm and under color of
official right in that defendant DON
"Mac" Marcato upon a threat to use official action and official influence as the Governor
of the State of
interests involving the Alabama Department of Transportation if Forrest "Mac" 1 did not
consent to pay, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1951.
Racketeering Act 5(d)
(Bribery, ALA. CODE 1975 § 13A-l0-61(a)(2))
42. In or about September 2002, in the Middle District of Alabama and elsewhere, defendant
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN
while a public servant, solicited a pecuniary benefit upon an agreement and
understanding that his vote, opinion, judgment, exercise of discretion, and other action as
a public servant would thereby be corruptly influenced, to wit defendant DON EUGENE
SIEGELMAN, as the Governor of the State of
"Mac" Marcato in exchange for official action and influence to protect Forrest "Mac"
Marcato's business interests involving the Alabama Department of Transportation from
economic harm, all in violation of ALA. CODE 1975 § 1 3A- 10-61 (a)(2).
Racketeering Acts 5(e)-(kk)
- (Honest Services Mail Fraud,
18 U.S.C. § 2, 1341, & 1346)
The Scheme
43. From on or about October 15, 1 98 and continuing through on or about January
20, 2003, in the Middle District of
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN
aided and abetted by Gary Mack Roberts and others known and unknown to the Grand
Jury, knowingly and willfully devised and intended to devise a scheme and artifice to
defraud and deprive the State of
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN as Governor of the State of
Roberts as Director of the Alabama Department of Transportation (hereafter sometimes
"ALDOT"), performed free from deceit, favoritism, bias, self-enrichment, self-dealing,
and conflict of interest concerning ALDOT.
Purpose of the Scheme
44. It was the purpose of the scheme for DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN to use the
Executive Department of the State of
actions, and influence concerning ALDOT for money and property t, o which he was not
entitled.
Manner and Means of the Scheme
45. It was part of the scheme and artifice to defraud that:
a. DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN would and did demand money and property to which he
was not entitled from Jimmy Lynn Allen in exchange for DON EUGENE
SIEGELMAN's official protection from economic harm of Jimmy Lynn Allen's business
interests involving ALDOT, including Jimmy Lynn Allen's investment of approximately
$20 million in
certain bridges affected by prospective
b. DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN would and did demand money and property to which
he was not entitled from Jimmy Lynn Allen in exchange for allowing Jimmy Lynn Allen
to select for appointment by DON EUGENE SIEG LMAN a Director of ALDOT who
would both protect and further Jimmy Lynn Allen's business interests involving ALDOT,
including Jimmy Lynn Allen's investment of approximately $20 million in certain
bridges affected by
Rainline Inverted Profile Traffic Stripe (hereafter sometimes "Rainline") for use in
c. DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN would and did demand $100,000 to which he was not
entitled from Jimmy Lynn Allen.
d. DON EUGENE SLEGELMAN would and did accept $40,000 to which he was not
entitled from Jimmy Lynn Allen.
e. DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and Jimmy Lynn Allen would and did make
Mack Roberts aware of the scheme.
f. Gary Mack Roberts would and did monitor election polls prior t, o the 1998 general
election in
SIEGELMAN becoming Governor of the State of
g. Gary Mack Roberts would and did accept the position of Director of ALDOT from
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN with Jimmy Lynn Allen's approval.
h. Gary Mack Roberts would and did use official action and official influence as the
Director of ALDOT to facilitate Jimmy Lynn Allen's business interests involving
ALDOT, including Jimmy Lynn Allen's investment of approximately $20 million in
certain bridges affected
by
road construction contracts.
1. DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN w and did demonstrate to Jimmy Lynn Allen that DON
EUGENE SIEGELMAN was aware o benefits to Jimmy Lynn Allen's business interests
in Rainline from ALDOT actions under he Directorship of Gary Mack Roberts.
j. DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN would and did demand $250,000 to which he was not
entitled from Forrest "Mac" Marcato, owner of the Rainline patent, in exchange for
official protection from economic harm of Forrest "Mac" Marcato's business interests,
including ALDOT’s specifications of Rainline for use in
Execution of the Scheme
46. On or about each date listed below, in the Middle District of Alabama and elsewhere,
defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN, aided and abetted by Gary Mack Roberts and
others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, for the purpose of executing an, d
attempting to execute the above-described scheme and artifice to defraud and deprive,
placed and caused to be placed in a post office and an authorized depository for mail, to
be sent and delivered, by the United States Postal Service, the following matters and
things:
| Act | Date | Description |
| 5(e) | | Agreement allocating $1,265,280 from ALDOT in |
| 5(f) | 5/24./99 | Agreement allocating $502,000 from ALDOT in |
| 5(g) | | Agreement allocating $309,191 from ALDOT in |
| Act | Date | Description |
| 5(h) | | Agreement allocating $3,107,500 from ALDOT in |
| 5(i) | | Agreement allocating $13,392,600, from ALDOT in |
| 5(j) | | Agreement allocating $3,456,200 from ALDOT in |
| 5(k) | | Agreement allocating $5,960,000 from ALDOT in |
| 5(l) | | Agreement allocating $10,153,100 from ALDOT in |
| 5(m) | | Agreement allocating $4,397,800 from ALDOT in |
| 5(n) | | Revised Agreement allocating $13,392,600 from ALDOT in |
| 5(o) | | A check in the amount of $37,752 from a contractor in |
| 5(p) | | A check in the amount of $37,752 from a contractor in |
| 5(q) | | A check in the amount of $71,588.88 from a contractor in |
| 5(r) | | A check in the amount of$ 104,897.61 from a contractor in |
| 5(s) | | A check in the amount of $69,931.74 from a contractor in |
| 5(t) | | A check in the amount of$139,863.48 from a contractor in |
| 5(u) | | A check in the amount of $139,863.48 from a contractor in |
| 5(v) | | A check in the amount of $139,863.48 from a contractor in |
| 5(w) | | A check in the amount of $314,692.83 from a contractor in |
Act Date Description 5(x) A check in the amount of $291,577.25 from a contractor in 5(y) A check in the amount of from a contractor in 5(z) A check in the amount of $35,464 from a contractor in 5(aa) A check in the amount of from a contractor in 5(bb) A check in the amount of $99,429 from a contractor in 5(cc) A check in the amount of $36,300 from a contractor in 5(dd) A check in the amount of $38,500 from a contractor in 5(ee) A check in the amount of $36,300 from a contractor in 5(ff) A check in the amount of $36,300 from a contractor in 5(gg) A check in the amount of $38,500 from a contractor in 5(hh) A check in the amount of $38,500 from a contractor in 5(ii) A check in the amount of $38,500 from a contractor in 5(jj) A check in the amount of $64,922.60 from a contractor in 5(kk) A check in the amount of $50,000 from a contractor in
,
all in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2, 1341, & , 1346.
Racketeering Act 5(ll)-(tt)
(Money Laundering,
18 U.S.C. § 2 & 1956(a)(1)(B)(i))
47. On or about
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN,
aided and abetted by others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, did knowingly
conduct and attempt to conduct a financial transaction, such transaction involving the use
of a financial institution which is engaged in, and the activities of which affect, interstate
commerce, to wit: defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN caused the deposit of each
check described below and written on the account of
Regions Bank in
named below at Colonial Bank in
proceeds of a specified unlawful activity, that is violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341, 1343, &
1951, and an act involving bribery in violation of ALA. CODE 1975 § I 7-22A-7,
knowing that the transaction was designed in whole and in part to conceal and disguise
the nature, location, source, ownership, and control of the proceeds of said specified
unlawful activity, and that while conducting and attempting to conduct such financial
transaction knew that the property involved in the financial transaction, that is each check
described below represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity.
| Act | Check Number | Payee/PAC | Amount |
| 5(ll) | 1628 | 21st Cen Pac | $4,444.44 |
| 5(mm) | 1629 | Alabez Pac | $4,444.44 |
| 5(nn) | 1630 | Ecodev Pac | $4,444.44 |
| 5(oo) | 1631 | Enviro Pac | $4,444.44 |
Act Check Number Payee/PAC Amount 5(pp) 1632 Green Pac $4,444.44 5(qq) 1633 Growth Pac $4,444.44 5(rr) 1634 JDC Pac $4,444.44 5(ss) 1635 $4,444.44 5(tt) 1636 Vision Pac $4,444.44
All in violation of 18
All done in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1962(c).
COUNT THREE
(Federal Funds Bribery,
18 U.S.C. § 2 & 666(a)(1)(B))
48. The executive branch of the State of
excess of$10,000 in every twelve month period from January 1998 to the present
pursuant to federal programs providing assistance to the State.
49. From on or about
the exact dates being unknown to the grand jury, in
within the Middle District of Alabama and elsewhere, the defendant
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN
being an agent of a State government, aided and abetted by defendant
RICHARD SCRUSHY
and others known and unknown to the grand jury, which State government received
federal assistance in excess of $10,000 in a one-year period, did corruptly solicit and
demand for the benefit of any person, and accept and agree to accept, anything of value
from any person,
intending to be influenced and rewarded in connection with any business, transaction, and
series of transactions of such State government involving anything of value of $5,000 or
more, to wit:
defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN, being Governor of the State of Alabama,
corruptly solicited, demanded, accepted, and agreed to accept $500,000 from defendant
RICHARD SCRUSHY, intending to be influenced and rew ed in connection with the
appointment of defendant RICHARD SCRUSHY to the CON Board.
All done in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 666(a)(1)(B) and 2.
COUNT FOUR
(Federal Funds Bribery,
18 U.S.C. § 2 & 666(a)(2))
50. The executive branch of the State of
excess of $10,000 in every twelve month period from January 1998 to the present
pursuant to federal programs providing assistance to the State.
51. From on or about
the exact dates being unknown to the grand jury, in
within the
Middle District of Alabama and elsewhere, the defendant
RICHARD SCRUSHY
aided and abetted by defendant
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN
and others known and unknown to the grand jury, did corruptly give, offer, and agree to
give anything of value to any person, with intent to influence and reward an agent of
State government, which State government received federal assistance in excess of
$10,000 in a one-year period, in connection with any business, transaction, or series of
transactions of such State government
involving anything of value of $5,000 or more, to wit: defendant SCRUSHY corruptly
gave, offered, and agreed to give $500,000 to defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELM.AN,
Governor of the State of
EUGENE SIEGELMAN in connection with the appointment of defendant RICHARD
SCRUSHY to the CON Board.
All done in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 666(a)(2) and 2.
COUNT FIVE
(Honest Services Mail Fraud,
18 U.S.C. § 2,1341, & 1346)
The Scheme
52. From on or about
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and
RICHARD M. SCRUSHY,
aided and abetted by each other and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury,
knowingly and willfully devised and intended to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud
and deprive the State of
EUGENE SIEGELMAN in his capacity as Governor of the State of
free from deceit, favoritism, bias, self- enrichment, self-dealing, and conflict of interest
concerning the State of Alabama Certificate of Need Review Board.
53. The Grand Jury realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 18-19 of this Indi describing
the Purpose of the Scheme and the Manner and Means of the Scheme, as though fully set forth in this Count.
Execution of the Scheme
54. On or about the date listed below in the Middle District of Alabama and elsewhere,
defendants DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and RICHARD M. SCRUSHY, aided and
abetted by each other and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, for the purpose
of executing and attempting to execute the above-d scribed scheme and artifice to
defraud and deprive, placed and caused to be placed in a post office and an authorized
depository for mail, to be sent and delivered by the United States Postal Service, and to
be sent and delivered by a private and commercial interstate carrier, the following matter
and thing:
| COUNT | Date | Description |
| FIVE | | Letter of Appointment of a member of the CON Board employed by HealthSouth Corporation, mailed from |
all in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 2, 1341, & 1346.
COUNTS SIX THROUGH EIGHT
(Honest Services Mail Fraud,
18 U.S.C. § 2, 1341, & 1346)
The Scheme
55. From in or about August 1997, to on or about
District of Alabama and elsewhere, defendants
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and
PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK,
aided and abetted by each other, by Clayton "Lanny" Young, by Nicholas D. Bailey, and
by others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, knowingly and willfully devised and
intended to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud and deprive the State of
its right to the honest and
faithful services of themselves as public officials and employees of the State of
performed free from deceit, favoritism, bias, self enrichment, self-dealing, and conflict of
interest, concerning alcoholic beverage and waste disposal regulation, the assessment and
collection of hazardous waste fees and taxes, allocation of municipal bond funding, and
state construction contracting.
56. The Grand Jury realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 29-30 of this Indictment,
describing the Purpose of the Scheme and the Manner and Means of the Scheme, as
though fully set forth in this Count.
Execution of the Scheme
57. On or about the date of each Count listed below, in the Middle District of Alabama
and elsewhere, defendants DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and PAUL MICHAEL
HAMRICK, aided and abetted by each other and others known and unknown to the
Grand Jury, for the purpose of executing and attempting to execute the above-described
scheme and artifice to defraud and deprive, placed and caused to be placed in a post
office and an authorized depository for mail, to be sent and delivered by the
Postal Service, and to be sent and delivered by a private and commercial interstate
carrier, the following matters and things:
| COUNT | Date | Description |
| SIX | | Hazardous Waste Fee Report mailed from a facility in |
| SEVEN | | Hazardous Waste Fee Report mailed from a facility in |
COUNT Date Description EIGHT Hazardous Waste Fee Report mailed from a facility in
All done in violation of Title 18, United ttates Code, Sections 2, 1341, & 1346.
COUNTS NINE THROUGH TEN
(Honest Services Wire Fraud,
18 U.S.C. § 2, 1343, & 1346)
58. The Grand Jury realleges an, d incorporates Paragraphs 55 and 29.30 of this
Indictment, describing the Scheme, the Purpose of the Scheme, and the Manner and
Means of the Scheme, as though fully set forth in this Count.
Execution of the Scheme
59. On or about the date of each Count listed below, in the Middle District of Alabama
and elsewhere, defendants DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN and PAUL MICHAEL
HAMRICK, aided and abetted by each other and others known and unknown to the
Grand Jury, for the purpose of executing the above-described scheme and artifice to
defraud and deprive, transmitted and caused to be transmitted by means of wire
communication in interstate commerce, the following writings, signals and sounds:
| COUNT | Date | Description |
| NINE | | Facsimile transmission from |
| TEN | | Facsimile transmission from |
All done in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 2, 1343, & 1346.
COUNT ELEVEN
(Obstruction of Justice,
18 U.S.C 1512(b)(3))
60. On or about
PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK,
did knowingly corruptly persuade and attempt t knowingly corruptly persuade another
person, and did engage in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to
hinder, delay, and prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer of the United
States of information relating to the commission of a federal offense and a possible
commission of a federal offense, to wit, defendant PAUL MICHAEL HAMRICK did
give a check in the amount of $3,000 to Clayton "Lanny" Young with intent to hinder,
delay, and prevent communication to the Federal Bureau of Investigation by Clayton
"Lanny" Young of information concerning federal offenses related to $6,000 that Clayton
"Lanny" Young gave to PAUL MICHAEL }iAMRICK on
All done in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1512(b)(3).
COUNT TWELVE
(Obstruction of Justice,
18 U.S.C. § 2 & 151 2(b)(3))
61. On or about
DON EUGENE SIIEGELMAN,
aided and abetted by others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, did knowingly
corruptly persuade and attempt to knowingly corruptly persuade another person, and did
engage in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to hinder, delay, and
prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer of the
information relating to the commission of a federal offense and a possible commission of a federal offense, to
wit, defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN did cause Nicholas D. Bailey to write a check
in the amount of $10,503.39 to Clayton "Lanny" Young with the notation "repayment of
loan plus interest" with intent to hinder, delay, and prevent communication to the Federal
Bureau of Investigation by Clayton “Lanny” Young and Nicholas D. Bailey of
information concerning federal offenses related to $9,200 that Clayton "Lanny" Young
gave to DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN on
All done in violation of Title 18, United States Code,.Sections 2 & 1512(b)(3).
COUNT THIRTEEN
(Obstruction of Justice,
18 U.S.C. § 2 & 1512
62. On or about October16, 2001, in the Middle District of Alabama, the defendant
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN,
aided and abetted by others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, did knowingly
corruptly persuade and attempt to knowingly corruptly persuade another person, and did
engage in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to hinder, delay, and
prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer of the
information relating to the commission of a federal offense and a possible commission of
a federal offense, to wit, defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN did cause Nicholas D.
Bailey to provide him with a check in the amount of $2,973.35 with the notation "balance
due on m/c" with intent to hinder, delay, and prevent communication to the Federal
Bureau of Investigation by Clayton "Lanny" Young and Nicholas D. Bailey, and by
counsel for Nicholas D. Bailey, of information concerning federal offenses related to
$9,200 that Clayton "Lanny" Young gave to DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN on
All done in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 2 and 15 12(b)(3).
COUNTS FOURTEEN THROUGH TWENTY-NINE
(Honest Services
18 U.S.C. § , 1341, & 1346)
The Scheme
63. From on or about
20, 2003, in the Middle District of Alabama and elsewhere, defendant
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN
aided and abetted by defendant
GARY MACK ROBERTS
and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, knowingly and willfully devised and
intended to devise a scheme and artifice to defraud and deprive the State of
its right to the honest and faithful services of DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN as Governor
of the State of
Department of Transportation (hereafter sometimes "ALDOT"), performed free from
deceit, favoritism, bias, self-enrichment, self-dealing, and conflict of interest concerning
ALDOT.
64. The Grand Jury realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 44-45 of this Indictment, the
Purpose of the Scheme and the Manner and Means of the Scheme, as though fully set
forth in this Count.
Execution of the Scheme
65. On or about the date of each Count listed below, in the Middle District of Alabama
and elsewhere, defendant DON EUGENE SIIEGELMAN, aided and abetted by
MACK
ROBERTS and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, for the purpose of
executing and attempting to execute the above-described scheme and artifice to defraud
and deprive, placed and caused to be placed in a post office and an authorized depository
for mail, to be sent and delivered by the United States Postal Service, the following
matters and things:
| COUNT | Date | Description |
| FOURTEEN | | Agreement allocating $10,153,100 from ALDOT in |
| FIFTEEN | | Agreement allocating $4,397,800 from ALDOT in |
| SIXTEEN | | Revised Agreement allocating $13,392,600 from ALDOT in |
| SEVENTEEN | | A check in the amount of $36,300 from a contractor in |
| EIGHTEEN | | A check in the amount of $35,464 from a contractor in |
| NINETEEN | | A check in the amount of $36,300 from a contractor in |
| TWENTY | | A check in the amount of $99,429 from a contractor in |
| TWENTY-ONE | | A check in the amount of $36,300 a contrator in |
| TWENTY-TWO | | A check in the amount of $38,500 from a contractor in |
| TWENTY-THREE | | A check in the amount of $36,300 from a contractor in |
COUNT Date Description TWENTY-FIVE A check in the amount of $38,500 from a contractor in TWENTY-SIX A check in the amount of $38,500 from a contractor in TWENTY-SEVEN A check in the amount of $38,500 from a contractor in TWENTY-EIGHT A check in the amount of $64,922.60 from a contractor in TWENTY-NINE A check in the amount of $50,000 from a contractor in
All done in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 2, 1341, & 1346.
COUNT THIRTY
(Extortion under Color of Official Right and
by Fear of Economic Harm, 18 U.S.C. § 1951)
66. In or about September 2002, in the Middle District of Alabama and elsewhere,
defendant
DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN
while the Governor of the State of
attempt to obstruct, delay, and affect, commerce and the movement of articles and
commodities in commerce by extortion, as those terms are defined in Title 18, United
States Code, Section 1951; that is, defendant DON EUGENE SIEGELMAN, unlawfully
demanded $250,000 from Forrest "Mac" Marcato, induced by wrongful use of fear of
economic harm and under color of official right in that defendant DON EUGENE
SIEGELMAN demanded $250,000 from Forrest "Mac"Marcato upon a threat to use
official action and official influence as the Governor of the State of
economic harm to Forrest “Mac” Marcato’s business interests involving the
Department of Transportation if Forrest "Mac" Marcato did not consent to pay.
All done in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1951.
A TRUE BILL
Signed
Foreperson
Signed
NOEL L. FILLMAN
Chief, Public Integrity Section
Criminal Division
United States Department of Justice
Signed
LOUIS V. FRANKLIN, SR.
Acting
Signed
RICHARD C. PILGER
Trial Attorney
Public Integrity Section
Signed
STEPHEN P. FEAGA
Assistant
Signed
J.B.
Assistant United States Attorney
Signed
JOSEPH L. FITZPATRICK, JR.
Special Assistant United States Attorney
Middle District of




