Undersheriff, Apple security chief, businessman indicted in bribery schemes
Defendants include Santa Clara County Sheriff Laurie Smith's second-in-command
by Sue Dremann / Palo Alto Weekly

Uploaded: Fri, Nov 20, 2020, 7:22 pm 4
Updated: Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 3:30 pm
Time to read: about 4 minutes

Four people, including top brass in the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office, have been indicted in bribery schemes for donations to Sheriff Laurie Smith's reelection campaign in exchange for highly coveted gun permits.



A grand jury issued two indictments ​on Thursday, Nov. 19, against Undersheriff Rick Sung, 48, and Capt. James Jensen, 43, who are accused of requesting bribes for concealed firearms licenses, also known as CCW licenses. Insurance broker Harpreet Chadha, 49, and Apple's Chief Security Officer Thomas Moyer, 50, are accused of offering bribes to receive the permits, District Attorney Jeff Rosen said during a press conference on Monday morning.

The two-year investigation by the district attorney's office found that Sung, who was allegedly aided by Jensen in one instance, held up the distribution of CCW licenses and refused to release them until the applicants gave something of value. Investigators determined some of the money was sent to Sheriff Smith's reelection campaign, Rosen said.

Sung has been indicted on three counts of asking or receiving a bribe by an executive officer, a felony, for incidents dating between Oct. 1, 2017 and April 30, 2018, for allegedly asking for a bribe from Chadha and for asking for a bribe from Moyer between Dec. 7, 2018 and Feb. 14, 2019, according to the redacted indictments. Jensen, who was previously indicted, is also now charged with asking for or receiving a bribe by an executive officer for the scheme involving Moyer.

Moyer and Chadha each face a single count of bribing an executive officer. So far, 13 people have been indicted in the bribery schemes. Three people pleaded guilty on Aug. 31 and Oct. 19, Rosen said. Thirty-two witnesses testified before the grand jury, including former U.S. Rep. Mike Honda, D-San Jose, according to the indictment witness list.



Sung and Jensen allegedly held up four gun licenses from Apple employees and extracted from Moyer a promise that Apple would donate iPads to the sheriff's office. A donation of 200 iPads worth nearly $70,000 was ended at the last minute after Aug. 2, 2019, when Sung and Moyer learned that the district attorney's office had issued a search warrant seizing all of the sheriff's office's CCW license records.

Sung allegedly received a promise from Chadha of $6,000 worth of luxury box seat tickets to a San Jose Sharks hockey game at the SAP Center on Valentine's Day 2019. Sheriff Smith’s family members and some of her biggest political supporters held a small celebration of her reelection as sheriff in the suite, according to a statement from the district attorney's office.

Sung is the highest ranking law enforcement officer ever indicted in the county, Rosen said.

Capt. James Jensen, a past spokesperson in the sheriff's office, was previously indicted in the concealed carry weapon (CCW) license bribery case. Gun permits, known as CCW permits, are not easily obtained. The manager of an executive protection company, AS Solution Inc., allegedly received the gun permits for his executive protection agents in exchange for a $90,000 bribe to Smith's reelection campaign between April 2018 and August 2019. Multiple people, including a local gun parts manufacturer and an attorney, were also indicted.

"Undersheriff Sung and Capt. Jensen treated CCW licenses as commodities and found willing buyers. Bribe seekers should be reported to the District Attorney's Office, not rewarded with compliance," Rosen said.


"Call this quid pro quo. Call it pay-to-play. Call it give to get. It is illegal and deeply erodes public confidence in the criminal justice system.

"When high-ranking members of a law enforcement agency are at the heart of a bribery scheme, it tarnishes the badge, the honor, the reputations and — tragically — the effectiveness of all law enforcement agencies," Rosen said.

The defendants are expected to surrender shortly, he said. They will be arraigned on Jan. 11 at the Hall of Justice in San Jose. If convicted, the defendants could receive prison time.

Sung has been placed on administrative leave and Jensen has been on administrative leave since August. The sheriff's office continues to cooperate with the District Attorney's Office, the agency said in a Nov. 20 statement.

On Monday, the sheriff's office issued another statement: "As law enforcement officers, we are held to the highest moral and ethical standards. This is a difficult time for our organization, however our goal remains to provide the highest level of public safety to the residents of Santa Clara County. The hundreds of men and women who represent the Sheriff’s Office will continue to serve our community with compassion, honesty and integrity."


A CCW license generally costs between $200 and $400. Under state law, it is a crime to carry a concealed firearm without a CCW license. State law requires that an applicant show "good cause" for the license, in addition to completing a firearms course and having good moral character, but the sheriff has broad discretion in determining qualified applicants, the district attorney's office press release.

Rosen said that there could be additional indictments and charges. Asked whether Smith, who signs off on all gun permits, knew or should have known about the bribery schemes, Rosen said, "That's your question. There's nothing more I can say."

Smith and Sung could not directly be reached for comment. A sheriff's spokesperson referred only to the general statement from the agency after a request for comment from Smith.

Moyer's attorney, Ed Swanson of Swanson & McNamara, said in a statement that his client is innocent and that his reputation has been tarnished by "baseless charges."

"Ultimately, this case is about a long, bitter, and very public dispute between the Santa Clara County Sheriff and the District Attorney, and Tom is collateral damage to that dispute. We look forward to making Tom’s innocence clear in court and bringing an end to this wrong-headed prosecution," he said.

Apple, in a brief statement, echoed its support for Moyer on Monday.

"We expect all of our employees to conduct themselves with integrity. After learning of the allegations, we conducted a thorough internal investigation and found no wrongdoing," the Cupertino-based company said.

The grand jury report could be publicly released in the next two to three weeks if it is not sealed by the court, a move the district attorney's office does not oppose, Rosen said.


https://www.paloaltoonline.com...n-gun-permit-scandal

Where did this occur? I cannot find mention of a state in the article (as is usually the case when something is simply copy and pasted rather than given some additional context).

California

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Where did this occur? I cannot find mention of a state in the article (as is usually the case when something is simply copy and pasted rather than given some additional context).

Santa Clara County. California is rather odd in terms of issuing CCWs as they go by county rather than state.

As you can see, Santa Clara county is in the red, nearly unobtainable to the average citizen. Only a little over 100 people have them issued from there.

Basically 8 counties in a state as large as California has ruined CA and also ruined other parts of the country with them exporting their bullshit.

This is what happens when you have may issue instead of shall issue.

They should go back and look at all the cases the two cops were involved in to see if they were legit cases. How many people were put in prison or fined because they refused to pay bribes? The businessman and apple guy should be immediately fired.

This case has been percolating under the surface for a while. I was born and raised in Santa Clara county for the first 30 plus years of my life. The chances of a “normal” person getting a CCW in that county is none and none. There are rumours some San Jose Sharks players may have gotten CCW as well for a small fee. Also some tech executives personal security were alleged to have gotten CCW for a fee as well as a donation to the sheriffs department re-election fund.

They are the worst kind of of corrupt crooks.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Where did this occur? I cannot find mention of a state in the article (as is usually the case when something is simply copy and pasted rather than given some additional context).

Silicon Valley, which is the South Bay area between Palo Alto and San Jose.

Apple's chief security officer is no small fish. One would think that his request for a CCW for himself would be okayed. The sheriff had to be in on this.

The bribery probably isn't confined to the CCW office. Any government office that must give its blessing before one can proceed should be watched for soliciting a bribe. But who is watching the watchers? A golf buddy from that area told me of having a final building inspection approval held until he personally met with the head of the department.

quote:

Originally posted by werzjon229:
Undersheriff, Apple security chief, businessman indicted in bribery schemes
Defendants include Santa Clara Santa Clara County Sheriff Laurie Smith's second-in-command
by Sue Dremann / Palo Alto Palo Alto Weekly

Do you realize that there is more than one Palo Alto in the US? There is even more than one Santa Clara place name in the country.

After an Internet search I see that the two together evidently occur in only one state, but my point is that someone posts an article like this for what reason? Evidently to inform the membership about something they think is enlightening or otherwise important. And yet the rest of us are expected to either know something like which Palo Alto is being referenced or try to figure it out by referencing two place names and narrowing it down that way. That may be possible (and not always), but the value of the post would be enhanced with virtually no effort by the poster who could state at the beginning, “Occurred in California.”

When I read Palo Alto in the original source name, I guessed that it was in California because although I’ve never lived in the state or had any particular reason to be familiar with the area, I had heard the name before and I have a reasonably good memory for such things. But what if the place names had been the city of Springfield and Lake County? I have seen similar articles posted here about locations that were impossible to even guess at.

The odd thing about this story that stood out for me is that the bribes were channeled to the Sheriff Smith's re-election campaign and she apparently benefited directly from some of them, but there is no mention that she was indicted. I'm curious how she escaped prosecution or even a negative reference in the article. Reading the article, one almost gets the sense that she is a victim. Bt it seems unlikely that her deputies would be funneling bribes to her campaign without her knowledge and most likely direction.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
[Do you realize that there is more than one Palo Alto in the US? There is even more than one Santa Clara place name in the country.

The location didn't trigger my pea brain until the third word, Apple, followed by the second line, Santa Clara. Apple + (a Spanish place name) = California. Everyone (except possibly my older sister, who prides herself on her lack of knowledge of subjects she considers trivial) knows that Apple's tree is planted in California.

But yes, I agree that posts about a place should be clear as to where the heck the place is.
Who
What
When
now Where

I find it interesting that Apple is actually defending their guy and saying their internal investigation showed no wrongdoing. Sounds like a coverup of a much larger problem and they are being nice to keep this guy quiet.

Most corporations would drop you like a stone if indicted for any crime like this.

This is Left Coast politics at its finest. Dirty Sheriff's office, coupled with entitled corporate goons.

Big black eye on Apple. It reminds me of the furor Steve Jobs started by not having license plates on his vehicles.

I am SO glad I moved...

quote:

Originally posted by ElToro:
This case has been percolating under the surface for a while. I was born and raised in Santa Clara county for the first 30 plus years of my life. The chances of a “normal” person getting a CCW in that county is none and none. There are rumours some San Jose Sharks players may have gotten CCW as well for a small fee. Also some tech executives personal security were alleged to have gotten CCW for a fee as well as a donation to the sheriffs department re-election fund.

They are the worst kind of of corrupt crooks.

We moved to Silicon Valley for 2 years, turned out to be 38 years. I understand Sheriff Laurie Smith, when she got into office, cancelled any/all CCW for retired LEO's. But the scuttlebutt was, if you have enough money, you can get one.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Do you realize that there is more than one Palo Alto in the US? There is even more than one Santa Clara place name in the country.

This is a good point. I didn’t consider it, having worked in that area and having the context, but I can see where it could have been opaque to folks without local experience. There have been some other posts where I dug through the article and was unable to figure out what state they happened in.

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
The odd thing about this story that stood out for me is that the bribes were channeled to the Sheriff Smith's re-election campaign and she apparently benefited directly from some of them, but there is no mention that she was indicted. I'm curious how she escaped prosecution or even a negative reference in the article. Reading the article, one almost gets the sense that she is a victim. Bt it seems unlikely that her deputies would be funneling bribes to her campaign without her knowledge and most likely direction.

Not really odd. Simply one of two things: Either the sheriff, while a crook, is a smart crook, or the undersheriff, while a crook, is a good subordinate and is protecting his boss.

Just because a person is a corrupt individual does not automatically mean that they are an idiot or that they are not a team player.

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:


Most corporations would drop you like a stone if indicted for any crime like this.

Especially a position of trust like CSO. Duh. If we're lucky, he will get a flood of shareholder lawsuits for damage to the brand.

What a f-ing dip shit.

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:
If we're lucky, he will get a flood of shareholder lawsuits for damage to the brand.

Probably won't even get any air time in the Bay Area.

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:
I find it interesting that Apple is actually defending their guy and saying their internal investigation showed no wrongdoing. Sounds like a coverup of a much larger problem and they are being nice to keep this guy quiet.

Most corporations would drop you like a stone if indicted for any crime like this.

The underlying problem is that citizens and especially the head of corporate security for Apple should be able to obtain a CCW. California is going against our basic rights guaranteed in the US Bill of Rights.

Apple is trying to obtain a basic ability for their Chief of Security to do his job. However, being a true Lefty organization, they probably only want it for their guy and not the masses. Some persons are more equal than others.

quote:

Originally posted by c1steve:
The underlying problem is that citizens and especially the head of corporate security for Apple should be able to obtain a CCW.

The only thing I disagree with in your post is, “especially the head of corporate security for Apple”. This is the classic CA bullshit “rules for thee and not for me attitude.” The head of corporate security for Apple is no more of a citizen than anyone else and should have no more rights than any other law abiding citizen.