FBI sting at SHOT show arrests 21 for paying foreign bribes
22 suppliers to the military and law enforcement agencies were arrested in total



By Pete Yost
Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Twenty-two executives and employees at suppliers to the military and law enforcement agencies were arrested on the eve of their industry's annual trade show in Las Vegas after a 2 1/2-year undercover sting operation aimed at schemes to bribe a foreign official.

Charged are people at companies in eight U.S. states and executives at companies in the United Kingdom and Israel. Five defendants were identified in federal court in Las Vegas as British citizens. Two others were from Israel, and one was from Peru.

The Justice Department called the case the largest single investigation and prosecution of individuals in the history of the 1977 Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which bars bribery of foreign government officials. It also is the first large-scale use of an undercover operation in enforcing the corrupt practices act.

In a briefing for reporters, Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer, head of the Justice Department's criminal division, said there are more than 140 open investigations under the act.

Twenty-one of the 22 people caught up in the case were arrested in Las Vegas, where they were preparing to attend the 2010 Shooting, Hunting & Outdoor Trade Show, a convention with more than 55,000 attendees at the Sands Expo & Convention Center. The convention started Tuesday.

None of the 21 entered pleas during initial appearances before U.S. Magistrate Judge Peggy Leen. She set bond and release restrictions for 13 - ordering most to surrender their passports and instructing each to appear Feb. 3 in federal court in Washington.

The judge rescheduled detention hearings for three defendants until Wednesday and set hearings Thursday for another five.

The defendants allegedly agreed to pay a 20 percent commission to a sales agent they believed represented the defense minister for an African country. They were trying to win a multimillion-dollar deal to outfit the presidential guard.

The sales agent was actually an undercover FBI agent, and no defense minister was involved at all. Several of the indictments in the probe disclosed that at least one other FBI agent was operating under cover, posing as a procurement officer for the ministry of defense of the African nation.

In Las Vegas, word of the arrests came as a surprise to show organizers, said Mark Thomas, marketing and communications manager for the show host, the National Shooting Sports Foundation of Newtown, Connecticut. Thomas referred questions about the arrests to the FBI and Justice Department.

Those charged worked for companies in Arkansas, Virginia, Florida, California, Massachusetts, Georgia, Pennsylvania and Kentucky.

Indictments against each of the 22 individuals alleges conspiracy and substantive violations of the corrupt practices act and conspiracy to engage in money laundering. The charges relating to the corrupt practices act carry a maximum five-year prison sentence on conviction. The maximum sentence for money laundering conspiracy is 20 years.

___

Associated Press writer Ken Ritter in Las Vegas contributed to this report.

___

Well that will certainly put a damper on the show. I have to wonder what the underlying motivation for all this was. I understand these guys broke some laws. Since I am just a typical middle class guy I hardly understand the intricacies of our government or the FBI. Dosnt the government do this type of thing all the time?

Somehow it's not considered a bribe when a congressman or senator gets millions in more federal money for their state in return for a favorable vote on health care legislation.

quote:

Originally posted by Labman:
Somehow it's not considered a bribe when a congressman or senator gets millions in more federal money for their state in return for a favorable vote on health care legislation.

It's still considered a bribe. It's just a legal bribe. Gotta remember who writes those bribary laws.

How is it any different from SCI demanding "donations" from vendors to attend the show?

Hopefully the FBI has a bead on the Namibian NAPHA.

I for one am awestruck that the FBI gives a shit that bribes are occurring in the course of doing business in an African country.

Shouldn't they be concerned about crimes against the United Stated and its citizens??
I can't think of anything much more important than domestic security and terrorism. That is what I want the FBI focusing on, not some arms maker bribing and imaginary African minister or sombody selling bootleged coppies of Harry Potter DVDs!!!!

It's called the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, it was put into effect in 1977

and another way for wyatt erp to get into the headlines

Wonder what the chinese equivalant to that law is?

Simple really. If they are proven guilty then punish them to the full extent of the law. No different than anything else in my view. Should they be treated differently because they support our hobby? We certainly don't want to go down that path...

Does this upset anyone? Do you veiw that as an effective use of Federal law enforcement given what we are up against? Out of control, unsupervised, unaccountable and inexcusable on the taxpayer's dime. Or in other words, business as usual.

YEAH it upsets me. As a matter of fact it pisses me off to no end. I am not saying that it is right, but bribes for business contracts is normal in much of the world. I could see if this was for contractors trying to bribe a supposed US company, but COME ON !

I would EXPECT to need to bribe a government minister, politician or whatever to do any business in much of Africa and the third world........

Do these ass wipes really think that this will end corruption in government business in Africa??

I suppose something like finding the next terrorists in the US, doing something to enhance public saftey or solving a crime that at least has a victim is just too pedestrian for thews weenies.

FBI = Famous But Incompetent !!

The FBI is just another bunch of revenuers

One would think the FBI had more important tasks in the queue ...

Unauthorized office supply usage on Pennsylvania Avenue, for example.

I'm reserving judgment until I hear the details. It's a pretty good strategy, I think.

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act is the law of the land. It makes bribery of foreign officials in order to obtain contracts a federal crime.

Everyone regularly in the business of exporting goods to foreign governments is well aware of this law.

Whether it is violated in any given instance will depend on the facts, and on how a jury interprets them and applies the law to them.

quote:

Originally posted by Fjold:
How is it any different from SCI demanding "donations" from vendors to attend the show?

Or charging people looking to spend money $100 a day to get inside after charging the vendors booth space! Highway robbery at its finest

The Foreign Currupt Practices act is an effort, among other things, to keep U.S. citizens from being shaken down by officials in foreign countries. If these guys are guilty as charged, then they are partially responsible for the establishment and/or continuation of all of the little (and sometimes big) hits you and I take from the customs/police/airport officials when we travel to these same countries.

Whether the commodity involved is wheat, electronics, fuel, or guns, enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices act is beneficial to all of us.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
The Foreign Currupt Practices act is an effort, among other things, to keep U.S. citizens from being shaken down by officials in foreign countries. If these guys are guilty as charged, then they are partially responsible for the establishment and/or continuation of all of the little (and sometimes big) hits you and I take from the customs/police/airport officials when we travel to these same countries.

Whether the commodity involved is wheat, electronics, fuel, or guns, enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices act is beneficial to all of us.

Totally agree. Having worked in or visited on business various western & developing countries, I have found that in some instances American companies are happy to "play the game" but there are some US companies I have worked in who have high ethical standards.

I wish the US would sign the international agreement on legal adoption of children. Unfortunately the current position of the US encourages child trafficking & people pay big $$$ to adopt children. This is totally illegal in all countries which have signed this agreement.

First of all there were 21 who got CAUGHT.
That tells me it is pretty widespread.

Personally I don't have a problem with this only b/c it shows that LE is at work and you can't count out their involvement only because one assumes that the gov. won't care b/c it's 'too small'.
In my short life I've found that it's the 'small' guy who wants to get big. If they do so by illegal activities, then what are they going to be like when they do get big?

Since it is such a large number of people and companies, at least to me, I have to wonder a couple of things. One regardless of the law is this a necessary part of doing buisness in a situation like this? Second, who initiated this? I obviously have no direct knowledge of the facts but it seems to border on entrapment to me. The law is the law no matter what we may think of it. Breaking it is subject to penalty if caught. I do see a distinction in the way it is handled. I dont know if that is logical or just an emotional reaction on my part.

I think their time would be better spent setting up sting operations for people like Franklin Raines, Maxine Waters, Bwany Fwank, Chris Dodd and their ilk. Arresting and prosecuting those reprobates would better serve society than going after these industry people.

quote:

Originally posted by DLS:
I think their time would be better spent setting up sting operations for people like Franklin Raines, Maxine Waters, Bwany Fwank, Chris Dodd and their ilk. Arresting and prosecuting those reprobates would better serve society than going after these industry people.

Maybe you missed this part?

quote:

after a 2 1/2-year undercover sting operation aimed at schemes to bribe a foreign official.

Which retrobates were in charge 2 1/2 years ago?

If this thread continues to turn political we will just move it to the Political forum.

Don

quote:

Originally posted by DRG:

If this thread continues to turn political we will just move it to the Political forum.

Out of curiosity, do you consider your post to be appropriate for this forum?

quote:

The Foreign Currupt Practices act is an effort, among other things, to keep U.S. citizens from being shaken down by officials in foreign countries. If these guys are guilty as charged, then they are partially responsible for the establishment and/or continuation of all of the little (and sometimes big) hits you and I take from the customs/police/airport officials when we travel to these same countries.

Whether the commodity involved is wheat, electronics, fuel, or guns, enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices act is beneficial to all of us.

Are you saying that a law that makes bribing government officials illegal protects law abiding citizens from government officials who operate illegally? Please explain.

Sigh

quote:

Originally posted by DRG:

quote:

Originally posted by DLS:
I think their time would be better spent setting up sting operations for people like Franklin Raines, Maxine Waters, Bwany Fwank, Chris Dodd and their ilk. Arresting and prosecuting those reprobates would better serve society than going after these industry people.

Maybe you missed this part?

quote:

after a 2 1/2-year undercover sting operation aimed at schemes to bribe a foreign official.

Which retrobates were in charge 2 1/2 years ago?

If this thread continues to turn political we will just move it to the Political forum.

Don

Don, first of all, I was talking about Law Enforcement, not politics. YOU gave it the political flavor. I was suggesting that running a sting on the politiians I named might have been time and money better spent, and I can assure you that 2 1/2 years ago they were waist deep in all kinds of bad stuff that would get anyone in the private sector in trouble. If you doubt that, you should take some time to read about what happened with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. As someone in the residential real estate lending business, i can assure you that those idiots had a huge influence on the proglems that have resulted. You may not want to realize it because of your philosophy, but officials from the Bush Administration tried unsuccessfully to reign in FNMA and FHLMC, but those politiicans shut them down cold. My point was that perhaps the FBI could have succeeded where the Bush Administration failed.

And, Don, that is a law enforcement themed post, even you surely must realize that. It just so happens that the characters are some of your favored politicians.

quote:

Originally posted by 505 gibbs:

quote:

The Foreign Currupt Practices act is an effort, among other things, to keep U.S. citizens from being shaken down by officials in foreign countries. If these guys are guilty as charged, then they are partially responsible for the establishment and/or continuation of all of the little (and sometimes big) hits you and I take from the customs/police/airport officials when we travel to these same countries.

Whether the commodity involved is wheat, electronics, fuel, or guns, enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices act is beneficial to all of us.

Are you saying that a law that makes bribing government officials illegal protects law abiding citizens from government officials who operate illegally? Please explain.

The intent of the law is to keep Americans (and others within reach of American law) from offering or paying bribes, thus making bribery less lucretive for those who would demand it. The fewer bribes that are offered, the less demand there is for bribery. If those who are asked for a bribe pay off like slot machines, then bribes will be demanded of everyone. It's a pretty simple and well-documented concept. The law's thrust is similar to the policy the United States has always adhered to of not paying ransom. If you pay, you just generate more kidnappings. Prosecuting bribe-payers reduces the number and frequency of bribe-takers. Okay?

It also allows companies from countries who are not so puritanical in their outlook to steal trillions of dollars in business that might have gone to US companies. China, India, Brazil, Japan, and France come to mind immediately.

Who gets hurt by paying a business bribe? The briber figures it into his costs. The only people getting hurt are the people of the country on an international scale, or the customers of the company who are being bribed to use a certain product.....all are, in one way or another, paying the bribe. If it was up to me, I'd let foreign countries worry about their bribery laws and not stick the US's nose into it.

Bottom line: Stupid law.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
China, India, Brazil, Japan, and France...

Same countries where bribery is accepted and expected domestically as well.

The FCPA is a two edged sword for sure but all-in-all we're probably better off with it than without it. American companies can pay bribes so long as they are disclosed and not deducted for Federal Income Tax purposes...of course that is less attractive to the recipient.

At the risk of getting my head bitten off, can someone tell me what the difference is between the giving of a compulsory donation and a bribe?



Sorry about that chaps, but some things are just toooo good to resist!

quote:

Originally posted by ForrestB:

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
China, India, Brazil, Japan, and France...

Same countries where bribery is accepted and expected domestically as well.

The FCPA is a two edged sword for sure but all-in-all we're probably better off with it than without it. American companies can pay bribes so long as they are disclosed and not deducted for Federal Income Tax purposes...of course that is less attractive to the recipient.

How are we better off?

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
How are we better off?

By reducing the pressure on American companies to pay bribes. The large multi-nationals based here are just forced to use a little American ingenuity. Sure we loose some deals to the Chinese and French but we also win some (admittedly fewer) deals when the foreign governments needs to appear above reproach. I don't hear the Business Roundtable or the Chamber of Commerce asking for a repeal of the FCPA.

quote:

By reducing the pressure on American companies to pay bribes.

As I pointed out above, paying bribes costs the briber, that is, the American company nothing, it is simply added in as a cost.

I'm not trying to argue for arguments sake, but I repeat, how does paying a foreign business bribe hurt the briber?

The organizations mentioned don't ask for it for the same PC reasons that Obama calls for taxing banker's bonuses, not because it's right, but because it sounds good for the times, same thing in reverse, they don't want to be seen as endorsing a practice oversease which is illegal in the US.

Wheter the law is good ot not, the fact of the matter is that it is the law and has been so since the late 70's. If there are compelling arguments for a change, Congress can do that. But until then, it is something we have to deal with.

Any US company that does business outside of the US is well aware of the FCPA and its penalties. It may seem relatively harmless, but consider a few points (paraphrasing a post I made on another forum):

While it may seem harmless, it has a big impact on those operations that do obey the law. Some of these companies are public, and illicit earnings are something that can impact the public's confidence in our financial markets. It does harm those ethical companies committed to doing things right. Plain and simple, paying bribes to a foreign official to get a business advantage is cheating under present law.

Second, just where do many of these African countries get the funds for security and protection? You and me, via our tax dollars going overseas. When the assistance we provide is diverted from its intended purpose, the US taxpayer is not getting the bang they expect for their buck.

Third, one if not the biggest impediments to progress and stability in the third world is rampant corruption. Corruption is not conducive to stable allies of the US, and provides those that harbor ill will to us with a platform and opportunity for inflicting damage upon the US.

I don't have much time for cheaters or thieves, and when you cut through the rhetoric, that is exactly what those arrested did, in my view anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
I'm not trying to argue for arguments sake, but I repeat, how does paying a foreign business bribe hurt the briber?

In your scenario it wouldn't hurt the briber, but it would hurt all the briber's competition who were either unwilling or unable to pay the bribe. It would also mean the purchasing decision was not being made on the quality of the product, but rather on the company willing to pay the biggest bribe.

quote:

tell me what the difference is between the giving of a compulsory donation and a bribe?

The first one could be considered extortion. Similar to our taxes here.

The difference between the two is you expect to get something with a bribe.

quote:

Originally posted by bluefin:

The first one could be considered extortion.

OK, so extortion is when you give unwillingly to a demand and bribery is giving willingly to a demand........ Presumably, in the former case, the demander is guilty of extortion and in the latter, the briber is guilty of bribery but in both cases, guilt is involved?



Eish, but it gets better and better!

Extortion is moneys paid to prevent something bad from happening (ie don't pay taxes: go to jail)

Bribery us moneys paid to make something happen that otherwise might not (ie here's some money: don't tell what I just did back there)

Corruption is when somebody doesn't do what they are supposed to, either by payment or other influence. (ie This is my brother in laws car parked in a tow away zone so I won't have it towed.)

Now the question becomes, how come our squeaky clean lawmakers get trips paid for, free air fare, gifts, donations, etc. and that is not considered bribery.

John