Manhattan federal prosecutors, in a Friday court filing, rebuffed Mayor Eric Adams’ attempt to throw out one of the five criminal charges leveled against him last month.
In the legal papers filed by the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York on Oct. 18, federal prosecutors argue that the alleged conduct in the indictment does, in fact, constitute bribery — despite arguments to the contrary by Adams’ legal team. The mayor is accused of soliciting and accepting foreign gifts — including free or discounted flight upgrades and luxury hotel rooms — in exchange for helping hasten fire safety approvals for a Manhattan skyscraper on behalf of the Turkish government in 2021.
Prosecutors further argue all they needed to do was clearly inform Adams in the indictment of the charges against him in order to go to trial, which they say they did.
“Count Five describes a quid-pro-quo in which Adams sought and took luxury travel from a foreign official in exchange for influencing New York City’s regulation of a Manhattan skyscraper,” the filing reads. “Courts consistently find such allegations sufficient to demand trial before a jury. Moreover, Adams’s legal arguments contradict precedent, and his factual assertions stray far afield.”
Additionally, they stated that while Adams and his legal team have painted his alleged actions as standard among politicians that does not mean they are not illegal.
“Adams claims that accepting tens of thousand of dollars’ worth of benefits in exchange for pressuring a city agency is “routine” and “common,” prosecutors wrote. “But however routine that may have been for Adams, the law permits a jury to conclude that it was nonetheless illegal.”
Adams pleaded not guilty to charges of bribery, soliciting foreign campaign donations and bribery last month.
The latest legal papers from federal prosecutors came in response to a filing from Adams’ celebrity attorney Alex Spiro submitted late last month. Spiro’s filing sought to have the bribery charge, one of five leveled against the mayor on Sept. 26, tossed on the basis that the alleged misconduct described in the indictment did not rise to the level of bribery under federal law.
In their filing, prosecutors also pushed back on Spiro’s assertion that Adams accepted “gratuities” and not bribes and that his conduct is typical of what any politician.
Spiro’s argument rested on the idea that the indictment does not lay out a clear quid-pro-quo between Adams and the unnamed Turkish official who allegedly asked him to expedite FDNY approvals for the country’s consulate building in Midtown Manhattan.
The attorney also charged that his client allegedly pushing then-FDNY Commissioner Dan Nigro to allow the consulate to open without passing a fire inspection did not count as an “official act” because he was still Brooklyn borough president at the time and had no actual power over a building in Manhattan.
Addit0nally, Spiro argued the gifts Adams allegedly accepted were not bribes but “gratuities,” which are common among American politicians.
But in their filing, prosecutors cited case law arguing that evidence in bribery cases is “usually circumstantial” because “bribes are seldom accompanied by written contracts, receipts or public declarations of intentions.” They said the communications presented in the indictment are as clear evidence of bribery as can be demonstrated.
Specifically, the indictment cited communications between the Turkish official and an unnamed Adams staffer — believed to be his since-fired Turkish community liason Rana Abbasova. In the communications the Turkish official reminds the Adams staffer of all of the benefits Adams received from Turkish nationals over the years and allegedly said it was “his turn” now. To which Adams allegedly responded “I know.”
Prosecutors also countered Spiro’s argument that Adams’ intervention with the Turkish consulate did not qualify as an official act. They say he agreed to nab a temporary certificate of occupancy for the Turkish consulate building and that the “specific and focused” nature of that action means it qualified as an official act.
The Southern District is also due to file another response Friday to Spiro’s separate motion requesting the judge in the case — Judge Dale Ho — sanction prosecutors for allegedly leaking details of the case to the press over the past year.
Adams’ attorneys will have a week to respond to both motions, with all parties due back in court for an Oct. 30 conference.
Spiro could not immediately be reached for comment.
