Rubashkin antisemitism claims rebuffed by court

A federal judge ruled Friday that criminal indictments stemming from the May 2008 immigration raid at the Agriprocessors plant in Postville won’t be dismissed because they were not the result of antisemitism.

“The court finds Defendants have not met their heavy burden,” U.S. District Court Chief Judge Linda R. Reade wrote in her order. “The court empaneled this grand jury and charged it to set aside any private prejudices and only return indictments against those persons whom it found probable cause to believe had committed a federal crime. The court finds no credible, unbiased or competent evidence to show the grand jury violated its solemn oath.”

Attorneys for Sholom M. Rubashkin, former Agriprocessors executive, filed the motion to dismiss in late January. Their efforts were joined by attorneys for former plant supervisor Brent Beebe and the plant itself.

At a hearing on Feb. 23, the attorneys argued that the indictments could not stand because those who served on the grand jury were “infected by improper comment and consideration of religion, race and anti-Semitism.”

The Rubashkin family — founders and former operators of the Agriprocessors kosher meatpacking plant — subscribe to one of the largest Hasidic movements in Orthodox Judaism: Chabad-Lubavitch. The Agriprocessors plant in Postville was, prior to the raid, one of the nation’s largest distributors of kosher beef and poultry.

“Without divulging the specifics of the statements and questions at issue, it is the court’s firm conviction that there was no impropriety in these grand jury proceedings,” Reade said. “Simply put, Defendants have mischaracterized and taken out of context what are in truth innocuous statements and questions.”

Reade added that many of the statements challenged by the Rubashkin and Beebe legal teams were things said by witnesses, and not by members of the grand jury.

“The court is unwilling to impute the statements or beliefs of grand jury witnesses to all of the grand jury members,” Reade wrote.

The judge also found little use of the testimony offered by Patricia Kuehn, an Illinois-based consultant hired by the defense and allowed by the court to review portions of grand jury testimony.

“The government’s cross-examination of Ms. Keuhn was highly effective in that it exposed flaws in her reasoning, as well as her deep unfamiliarity with the federal grand jury process,” Reade noted.

Friday’s court order dealt only with the motion to dismiss. Defense attorneys have also requested the court hear each defendant’s case separately, and for a change of venue.

Jim Clarity, an attorney representing Agriprocessors’ interests, referred to the pretrial publicity as “sickening” and compared the plight of mounting a defense in the Northern District of Iowa to that of the Jews facing Nazi persecution in 1939 Poland.

“Move it to Minnesota or Chicago, but not Iowa because Iowa is poison,” Clarity said.

It is unknown when Reade will rule on the other motions. It is also unknown if any of the parties impacted by her refusal to dismiss will appeal.

The upcoming trail continues on the docket for September, although it could change.