How did the prosecution wrap up its case?
The prosecution’s closing argument began with a discussion of SnoOwl, the startup Correia founded before taking office. The case’s lead prosecutor, Zachary Hafer, emphasized how closely private investments aligned with Correia’s spending sprees at hotels, high-end restaurants and clothing stores. The prosecution took aim at Correia’s attempt to characterize many of these purchases as business expenses.
Hafer said a $457 valentine’s day cruise Correia took with his girlfriend did not secure any new business for SnoOwl, despite suggestions from Correia’s attorney that he had pitched the app to prospective users that night. The same goes for a gym where Correia charged his membership to the company card, and the $1,000-per-night hotels where Correia stayed while traveling with his girlfriend. Hafer referred back to testimony from an IRS investigator, who estimated Correia spent two-thirds of the company’s money on non-business expenses.
The prosecution then turned to testimony from marijuana vendors to tie up its case about corruption in Fall River’s City Hall, where Correia is accused of collecting bribes in exchange for municipal services.
At one point, Hafer waved a metal clipboard that a businessman, Charlie Saliby, said he used to personally hand Correia $75,000. Saliby testified that he received a letter of approval for his marijuana company on the spot.
“It doesn’t get any more arrogant,” Hafer said. “It doesn’t get any more illegal.”
Correia has maintained his innocence throughout the investigation and the trial. What did his attorney have to say?
Correia’s attorney, Kevin Reddington, addressed the SnoOwl charges first. He said Correia “thought mistakenly that this was money that was his…because he was producing and he was developing this app.”
The key there is intent. The judge told the jury that, in order to convict, they need to find there’s proof Correia deliberately misled his investors.
As for the alleged corruption at City Hall, Reddington focused on discrediting the witnesses who described the alleged bribes. Only one of the five marijuana vendors who testified claims they gave money to the mayor directly. Prosecutors did not present video or audio recordings of the exchange with Saliby, and Reddington argued the bribe never occurred.
“The FBI is all over him like a new suit,” Reddington said. “But Saliby would have you believe that he just blatantly pulls up, takes the $75,000 in cash, throws it in the backseat and gives him his letter of non-opposition and his community host agreement.”
Three other marijuana vendors said they paid bribes to Correia through middlemen. Reddington argued the middlemen were out to scam on their own, and that several of Correia’s approval letters had already been issued before the money exchanged hands. After the middlemen pleaded guilty in their own cases before Correia’s trial began, Reddington argued they were willing to “dance the dance” for prosecutors in exchange for lighter sentences.
Correia himself didn’t testify.
Now that the lawyers have finished presenting evidence and making their arguments, what happens next?
Starting on Tuesday, the jury is meeting privately to discuss each of the 24 charges against Correia. The judge instructed them to consider each charge separately. There’s no time limit on how long that could take.
If the jury does convict on any of the charges, the judge will decide the sentence several weeks later.
Four of Correia’s associates who pled guilty before the trial began — Tony Costa, Hildegar Camara, David Hebert and Gen Andrade — will also receive their sentences once Correia’s trial wraps up.
