IBJNews

Michigan lawyer claims Indiana prosecution was political

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Michigan attorney claims in a lawsuit that former Indianapolis prosecutor Carl Brizzi and former Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita used unwarranted charges against her in a cemetery theft scheme to enhance their political reputations.

Sherry Katz-Crank, of East Lansing, Mich., was indicted in 2008 on theft charges related to a scheme to raid $24 million in trust funds set aside for prepaid funerals and burials. A jury acquitted her in 2010.

The lawsuit filed last month in federal court in Michigan contends the charges were linked to legal work Katz-Crank did for cemetery owner Robert Nelms of Greenwood, who was sentenced in January 2010 to serve eight years in community corrections after pleading guilty to theft and securities fraud. The charges alleged Katz-Crank had aided Nelms in the scheme by providing him with legal advice, the lawsuit said.

The suit accuses Brizzi, Rokita and several investigators and assistant prosecutors with their former offices of malicious prosecution and violating Katz-Crank's constitutional rights.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority credited Katz-Crank with reporting the scheme to authorities, whose investigations eventually led to the arrests of Nelms and others, the lawsuit claims. But when Katz-Crank discovered the scheme and reported it to the Indiana secretary of state's office, an investigator there contacted her clients and advised them to stop using her services because she was involved in illegal activity, the document says.

The court issued summonses last week for several defendants, including Rokita, who is now a U.S. representative. The secretary of state's website still includes a statement from 2008 in which Rokita touts his office's work in the investigation that led to the indictments. Brizzi was Marion County prosecutor at the time.

Brizzi didn't respond to a phone call from The Associated Press seeking comment Friday. Rokita's congressional spokesman, Josh Bratton, said the office had not yet seen the complaint.

The lawsuit contends that prosecuting attorneys never turned over evidence to the jury that might have cleared Katz-Crank and that the prosecutors had reason to believe some witnesses' testimony was false.

"It is clear that Plaintiff's indictment was used as marketing material to support the political campaigns of Defendants for higher office without regard for the serious and permanent damage which it would impose upon the Plaintiff and her family," the lawsuit asserts.

The complaint claims that the "political hubris" by Rokita and Brizzi directly caused Katz-Crank to lose her reputation and law firm and cost her more than $2 million in financial losses. It also says the ordeal caused her to suffer depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and physical ailments that resulted in surgery and hospitalization.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Those of you yelling to deport them all should at least understand that the law allows minors (if not from a bordering country) to argue for asylum. If you don't like the law, you can petition Congress to change it. But you can't blindly scream that they all need to be deported now, unless you want your government to just decide which laws to follow and which to ignore.

  2. 52,000 children in a country with a population of nearly 300 million is decimal dust or a nano-amount of people that can be easily absorbed. In addition, the flow of children from central American countries is decreasing. BL - the country can easily absorb these children while at the same time trying to discourage more children from coming. There is tension between economic concerns and the values of Judeo-Christian believers. But, I cannot see how the economic argument can stand up against the values of the believers, which most people in this country espouse (but perhaps don't practice). The Governor, who is an alleged religious man and a family man, seems to favor the economic argument; I do not see how his position is tenable under the circumstances. Yes, this is a complicated situation made worse by politics but....these are helpless children without parents and many want to simply "ship" them back to who knows where. Where are our Hoosier hearts? I thought the term Hoosier was synonymous with hospitable.

  3. Illegal aliens. Not undocumented workers (too young anyway). I note that this article never uses the word illegal and calls them immigrants. Being married to a naturalized citizen, these people are criminals and need to be deported as soon as humanly possible. The border needs to be closed NOW.

  4. Send them back NOW.

  5. deport now

ADVERTISEMENT