Baltimore Mayor Convicted of Embezzlement
(Baltimore Sun photo by Algerina Perna / December 1, 2009) Mayor Sheila Dixon and her lead attorney, Arnold M. Weiner, face the media after her conviction on a single charge of taking gift cards intended for the city's poor
Julie Bykowicz and Annie Linskey | The Baltimore Sun via YellowBrix
December 01, 2009
In a statement Tuesday, Gov. Martin O’Malley said it is a sad day for Baltimore, but that its citizens should stay focused on day-to-day matters.
“It is more important than ever, during this difficult time, that everyone who cares about Baltimore stays focused on reducing crime in our neighborhoods, improving our schools, creating jobs and otherwise serving the people who live and work in Baltimore,” he said.
Prosecutors painted a picture of a corrupt official going on personal shopping sprees and described a collection of electronics found during the raid of her home: an Xbox, a PlayStation 2 and a video camera. A DVD of the action crime film, “Four Brothers,” was still in its original wrapping, Rohrbaugh said during opening statements, receipts dangling from his hand.
Dixon’s lawyers blamed the case on Lipscomb, a married man whom they said lavished her with gifts, including gift cards sent anonymously, as he pursued her romantically. Dixon thought gift cards delivered anonymously by another developer also came from Lipscomb, the defense argued.
Dixon’s defense team called just four witnesses, including the mayor’s pastor and a florist who testified about an anonymous, $285 bouquet sent by Lipscomb. Her attorneys argued she thought some of the gift cards were intended as personal gifts, while others, found in her home, were forgotten leftovers from a charity event.
Her conviction could force her suspension from office upon sentencing, followed by removal if she loses all appeals. City Council President Stephanie Rawlings-Blake is in line to be elevated to the mayor’s office, and remaining council members would pick a new president.
Rawlings-Blake said in a statement Tuesday afternoon that it is a “difficult and sad day for Baltimore.” She said she was making sure that public safety and essential public services are maintained. The council president also urged respect for the legal process.
Dixon, 55, has been under the cloud of the City Hall corruption probe for nearly four years, since she was City Council president. She was indicted in January. Still, she remains popular in Maryland’s largest city of about 630,000 residents.
Dixon became Baltimore’s first African-American woman mayor when she succeeded O’Malley in January 2007 after he was elected governor. She easily won a four-year term in November 2007.
She was praised during her first year in office for tackling crises swiftly, and her police commissioner, Frederick H. Bealefeld III, oversaw a drop in homicides to a 20-year low. Dixon also has pushed for a “cleaner, greener Baltimore” by introducing a new recycling program. Under her watch, the city sued lending giant Wells Fargo for allegedly singling out black residents for high-interest subprime mortgages, leading to foreclosures and vacant properties.
The gift card case has revived talk of Dixon’s perceived sense of entitlement. Her critics point to a pattern of behavior that suggests she thinks rules don’t apply to her. When she became City Council president in 1999, the state ethics commission advised her to step down from her part-time state government job, saying it raised potential conflicts of interest. Dixon kept the second job for more than two years.
She also steered city business to a company that employed her sister. And the city paid Dixon’s campaign chairman, without a contract, to do computer work at City Hall.
Dixon, a divorced mother, is known for chic attire and a quick temper. During a 1991 debate at City Hall on redistricting, she caused a stir when she took off one of her shoes, held it up and told white City Council members: “Now the shoe is on the other foot.”
Shoes came back to haunt her during the City Hall probe. Prosecutors said during the investigation that she bought a $570 pair of Jimmy Choo sandals while in Chicago with Lipscomb in 2004.
During the trial, her relatives, some City Council members and members of the city’s business community attended to show their support.
The Maryland Minority Contractors Association Inc. printed bumper stickers reading, “Save our Sisters,” in support of Dixon and City Councilwoman Helen Holton, who is criminally charged with taking contributions that exceed campaign finance limits — including contributions from Lipscomb.
The mayor’s legal troubles aren’t over with this case. She faces a separate trial on perjury charges stemming from accusations that she didn’t report gifts from Lipscomb. Lipscomb told a grand jury that he once gave Dixon $4,000 after the Chicago shopping spree. Dixon apparently used the money to pay her American Express bill.
Lipscomb made an illegal campaign contribution to Holton. The conviction will be expunged if he stays out of further legal trouble.
The nine women and three men on the jury had signaled Monday that they were stymied on one or more charges against the mayor, before abruptly changing course and asking the judge to let them resume deliberations this morning.
After the jury forewoman dispatched a note Monday afternoon declaring that the jurors “can not come to a unanymous [sic] decision on all counts,” Sweeney prepared to inquire whether they had reached a verdict on any of the five counts. But before he could put the question to them, the forewoman sent another note to the packed courtroom, asking for more time.
“We feel that we need to return tomorrow to continue deliberations, due to new things brought to light,” the note read. There was no elaboration.
Sweeney told the lawyers that he would give the jurors no special instructions this morning.
As he dismissed the jurors Monday, Sweeney told them, “We’re taking our guidance based on your last note. … Come back tomorrow morning and we will take it from there.”
Some nodded in response to Sweeney’s typical admonition to refrain from outside investigation, discussion and media reports about the case, but they otherwise showed no emotion.
It was the jury’s first reference to discord since the second day of deliberations, Nov. 20. At the end of the first and second days, jurors referred to their discussions as “out of order” and “overheated.” However, by the end of Day Two, jurors had twice reported “progress” in notes to the judge.
Since then, they had inquired about legal definitions and reviewed a video recording of three witnesses testifying.
Dixon’s defense team renewed its motion for a mistrial several times Monday and opposed all communication between the judge and the jury.
“Time itself has become the most coercive factor,” said Dale P. Kelberman, a Dixon attorney. In response to the note about “new things brought to light,” Weiner argued that the jury must be referring to information they’d learned outside of the trial, which is forbidden.
Sweeney, a retired Howard County judge who is considered a jury expert in the state, denied all mistrial requests. He said there was no need to apply “lawyer-like precision” to the phrase “new things brought to light,” saying it could mean anything.
Rohrbaugh urged the judge to let the jury keep deliberating.
“They must have some game plan,” he said of the jurors. He added, “I’m not sure why” they would want to quit for the day without hearing the judge’s response to the note about not being able to reach a unanimous decision.
Weiner said after court that the jury “seemed not to be able to reach a verdict but decided to give it one final try tomorrow.” Rohrbaugh said he had “no idea” what the jury’s notes could mean.
The two substantive notes from the jury forewoman arrived at 3:15 and 3:45 p.m. Monday. Earlier, jurors had sent at least three notes with typical requests, to take a break and to use their cell phones, which are not allowed in the jury room. One note, which a court spokesman characterized as containing “personal information” about a juror, was not made public.
Associated Press writers David Dishneau and Alex Dominguez contributed to this article.