IBJNews

Judge denies ex-Countrymark CEO’s release from prison

IBJ Staff
September 9, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

A federal judge has denied former Countrymark CEO David Swanson’s request to be let out of prison until an appeals court hears his case for early release later this month.

The 68-year-old former financial executive is serving a 12-year sentence stemming from his 2002 conviction for wire fraud, money laundering and tax evasion.

A federal appeals court in Chicago has agreed to hear his appeal claiming that his lawyers were derelict in not seeking a mistrial after the government presented its case.

Judge Sarah Evans Barker on Thursday denied his request for release, citing prosecutors’ concerns that Swanson is a flight risk.

“We simply are not convinced, given Swanson’s record, if given the opportunity to flee as opposed to returning to prison, that Swanson will obey this court’s orders,” she wrote.

A jury found Swanson guilty in October 2002 of stealing $2.7 million from Countrymark, an Indianapolis-based agricultural cooperative, in the 1990s.

He failed to appear for sentencing in January 2003 and was apprehended in Seattle about three weeks later.

Prosecutors also said in their arguments opposing Swanson’s motion to be released that the likelihood his appeal will be successful is “meager.”


 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Finally a decision well deserved
    Thank you judge Barker for not allowing this crook back on the streets!

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. First, the Athenaeum is going to have to get past the hurdle with the Lockerbie residents and the agreement that the parcel would be residential. Second, and in my opinion, this prime piece of property should include parking, PLUS, a black box theater(s), some market rate and affordable artist housing and a plan to renovate and reconfigure the second story theater. I would negotiate to add the DeHaan property surface parking lot into the development mix, place a one story surface parking garage on the DeHaan lot on the street level (for the Dehaan tenants use during the daytime) and add a second story to the garage that would become an addition to the current second story theater and then change the direction of the theater by moving the stage across the alley and on top of the DeHaan lot parking. You can add all the stage elements that are currently missing from the Athenaeum stage to make it more attractive for use by Ballet, Opera and traveling productions. Plus, the theater changes would probably help solve some of the soundproofing issues. Alas,it does not seem to be a part of the strategic plan to conduct a study to determine best use of the property. Seems like the current plan is a quick and easy move that ignores the property best use/potential and any strategic property planning for the effect on future generations.

  2. I recall that MSA's pilings are still in the ground and hard to remove. It’s not likely any proposal will include significant underground construction/parking because of this. Start adding 2 floors of retail, 8 floors of parking and 5-10 floors of possible hotel, and/or 10-20 floors of residential, and you are at 30 floors already with possible expansion of all the uses. But then again I could be wrong.

  3. Accoriding to their website there is no deadline to the Do Not Call list. What is this article referring to??

  4. On what planet are they entitled to this largesse from the stockholders? These people make multi-million dollar salaries: Pay for your own personal travel.

  5. It matters because they're already paid enormously fat salaries: Pay for your own personal travel. Being "taxed on it" isn't a valid excuse--so what? They're still being gifted a raft of luxury perks from somebody else's money on top of an enormous, lavish salary.

ADVERTISEMENT