Paul Jones and Conditions at FPC Pensacola

A reader posted a comment to my earlier post and provided a link to the following article describing the conditions for one Paul Jones at FPC Pensacola:

Paul Jones Still Prima Donna in Prison

The account of conditions at Pensacola were pretty much "spot on" except we made 12 cents/hour, not 11!!

It was slightly overcrowded. They had to convert a couple of TV rooms into separate dorm rooms. Obviously, for more detailed (and nuanced) descriptions of the conditions, you'll have to read the various articles in my blog that I posted while I was there.

(By the way, I can only shake my head at the tone of this article and the cold, heartless, ignorant comments that people make about someone they no nothing about. It is just amazing how the media just jumps on a story like this and literally crucifies an individual.)

Ironically, I knew Paul in prison for a couple of months. He reported on May 9, 2007 (5-6 weeks after me) and is due to be released July 5, 2008. He received a 16 month sentence of which he will serve 14 months with standard good-time credit of 15%. The last 1.4 months will be served in a halfway house, which means he should be released from Pensacola FPC in about a month. (I believe his family has moved to Bradenton, Florida from Ohio so he should be relocated there.)

Unfortunately, he was also convicted in state court and, in an unusual move, the judge ruled he must serve his 14 month sentence after he completes his federal sentence. Normally, the state will allow a defendant to serve his state sentence concurrent with an existing federal sentence, especially if the charges arise from the same conduct. Jones had already been sentenced to 16 months on the federal charges when he pleaded guilty in state court. (By the way, it is more common for a federal court to issue a consecutive sentence on top of a state sentence -- otherwise they wouldn't even bother with the case if they think justice has already been done at the state level.)

For a complete summary of his case, read this article.

You can also read details of the charges in the DOJ Press Release announcing his sentence.

In an effort to balance the scales a little to humanize Paul's situation, permit me to fill in a few personal details without, hopefully, compromising his privacy.

Basically, Paul was a career politician. He was mayor of Ravenna, Ohio in the late 70s, then 6 term state legislator before returning as mayor in the late 90s.

As I said, I knew Paul casually for a couple months. As is common among inmates, especially white collar inmates, we discuss our respective cases.

Paul was a perfectly pleasant guy. He is smaller than you might imagine... maybe 5'8" or 5'9".

The first thing you notice is his slightly unusual appearance, which may be typical of all career politicians! His hair looked like it had been sprayed on -- it was always perfect -- and had been tinted a reddish-blond color. Both of these conditions changed over the short time I knew him as his hair began to return to a darker color and didn't always look so "perfect" (although by prison standards he looked just fine!).

The second thing you notice is his tanned face... it almost had an orange tint to it, as if it had been sprayed on also -- something you don't see in prison everyday either, obviously. My guess is that has gone away in the last year.

So, based on appearance alone, Paul sort of stood out initially. Basically, he looked like a movie star.... or maybe a caricature of a movie star.

Having said that, he was a perfectly decent guy. He didn't come across as a prima donna -- as the article called him -- in prison (although I can understand how someone in politics as long as he could create such an impression).

Politians do not make a lot of money (at least not as politicians -- even Bill Clinton didn't make much in Arkansas or, for that matter, as President, which is why so many politicians must be rich, or marry rich, before going into politics). Paul's son had received admission to Harvard, but they could not afford the tuition. He helped his son set up a lawn care business that made enough money to help put his son through college. One of the clients, however, was a non-profit community develoment organization that receives federal funds channeled through the city. Technically, this was an organization that Paul had potential political influence over, which, again technically, creates a conflict of interest.

While the lawn business was a sole proprietorship in his son's name, Paul helped run it while his son was away and also filed the tax returns, which is where he got in trouble.

Apparently, he did not keep very good records, and "neglected" to report approximately $162,000 in revenue over a 3 year period, thereby depriving the IRS of about $50K in taxes. I believe an audit of one of his large clients revealed that they had paid his lawn business a lot of money and further investigation revealed that Paul had not reported it.

Did he do it on purpose? I don't know, but it is obviously a lot of money to not keep track of.

This is where politics enters in. If this had been you or me, the IRS would probably have simply required you to report the additional revenue and pay the missing $50K with additional penalties and interest.

But Paul was a former legislator and mayor. Over 25 years, you create political enemies who are prepared to bury you at the first opportunity. And he certainly gave them that opportunity.

He was charged with tax fraud. A little strong in my opinion but not out of bounds. Fair enough.

But he was also charged with mail fraud.

Mail fraud?

Yes, as a state politician, he is required to file financial disclosure forms. His disclosure forms likewise did not reveal the additional income that he failed to report on his taxes. Normally, this is a state misdemeanor and a small fine.

However, and this illustrates the absolute lunacy of federal law, he dropped the form in the mail rather than hand-delivering. Therefore, by using the mail to commit a crime (filing a false financial disclosure form), even a "crime" as minor as a state misdemeanor, his offense is now a federal felony. Thus, a mail fraud count -- based entirely on mailing an inaccurate state ethics form -- was added to "jack up" his sentence.

(Sometimes, a mail fraud count is added to a tax fraud simply because the tax return was mailed in.)

Furthermore, if he did not accept the plea deal, the feds threatened to indict his son for tax fraud since his sone was technically the owner of the business (threatening to indict family members, no matter how peripherally involved, is a common tactic federal prosecutors use to coerce plea deals). His son had completed law school and would not have been able to sit for the bar while under indictment. Had his son been convicted, good-bye law career.

Therefore, Paul fell on his sword and took the plea deal. (What would YOU do?) That's the way the system works. No matter how much you want to fight the charges and tell your side of the story, the system will not let you unless you are willing to pay an unbelievably huge personal price if you lose. (And, even if you win, you lose because the process will bankrupt you and destroy your life emotionally.)

His plea deal was for 12-18 months. Normally, you get the low end of the scale as a first offender. The judge gave him 16. Nice.

Did Paul probably break the tax laws? Sure.

Did the system exploit his mistake and absolutely bury him to the maximum extent allowed by the law, moreso than what it would have done for a non-public person? I have no doubt that it did.

Did politics play a role? You tell me.

25-30 years of public service of any otherwise good man flushed down the toilet.

That, my friends, as Paul Harvey would say, is the rest of the story.