There’s a new plot twist in the state’s five-year investigation of George E. Norcross III and others: the discovery that the Justice Department in Philadelphia declined to pursue charges based on a lack of admissible evidence in 2023 and that a revelation that an FBI agent may have gone prosecutor shopping in a bid to indict the Democratic powerbroker.
A court filing today alleges that after federal agents shopped their investigation of Norcross to federal prosecutors in two states, only to be rebuffed, they made their way to the Attorney General’s office, where they took on dual roles as “special state investigators” working for the embattled state Office of Public Integrity & Accountability.
A previously disclosed letter from the U.S. Attorney for New Jersey in September 2018 said that “no further action is warranted” in their probe of Norcross and that the “matter has been closed.”
But it wasn’t until a court filing today that an April 2023 letter from the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, which also cleared Norcross, was made public.
“Based upon review of the available admissible evidence, the applicable law, the probability of a successful trial, and the prosecution standards of the office, it is our opinion the matter should not be the subject of a federal prosecution,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney K.T. Newton, who signed the Eastern District letter addressed to FBI Special Agent Stephen Rich, who is also a special state investigator.
In another peculiar move, Michael Breslin quit his job as an FBI agent and now works as a deputy attorney general. He has one case on his plate: prosecuting Norcross and his co-defendants. Breslin was initially hired at a salary of $163,000 and received a raise this year to $187,450.
But incredibly, at the time she wrote the letter, Newton had already been deputized as a special deputy attorney general in New Jersey and is part of the team prosecuting Norcross. State records don’t indicate that Newton and Rich are on the payroll, an indication that they received state titles in order to be permitted to share information.
“The same investigators and prosecutors have shopped the same facts involving the same defendants to three different prosecutors’ offices for nearly a decade until one finally said yes,” said Chiesa, a former U.S. Senator and Deputy Attorney General, and Vartan, a former federal and state prosecutor.
Today’s court filing notes that the “2023 presentation ended without an indictment, and the AG began a new presentation in January 2024, culminating in the indictment.”
But it’s unclear whether the issues investigated by the Justice Department are the same as those in the state indictment. Federal and state laws are different.
The Pennsylvania letter came to light after a co-defendant in the Norcross prosecution filed a motion in Superior Court today to compel the OPIA to turn over unredacted wiretaps that are the source of critical evidence in the racketeering allegations.
The two defense attorneys claim the evidence was obtained illegally, citing Newton’s statement about admissible evidence.
The motion they filed in Superior Court today seeks to suppress the wiretap evidence if the recordings are not turned over.
“The suppression of the wiretap evidence would severely gut the State’s prosecution and call into question the validity of the indictment,” Chiesa and Vartan said.
Chiesa and Vartan argue that the OPIA has lower standards for prosecution than two Justice Department offices acting independently.
“It was only the Attorney General who had a different ‘opinion’ based on the exact same evidence,” Chiesa and Vartan said. “There is just one conclusion to be drawn—that the Attorney General prizes headlines over prosecution standards.
They added, “It is far past time for the self-titled Office of Public Integrity and Accountability to stop playing a cynical game of hide-the-ball.”
The attorney general’s response brief on a motion to dismiss the indictment against Norcross and others is due Friday.
Norcross, one of the most powerful political insiders in state the state for the last 35 years, was indicted in June for allegedly creating a criminal enterprise that used “threats and fear of economic and reputational harm” to obtain lucrative property rights along the Camden waterfront and influencing tailor-made legislation that came with bankable tax breaks for Norcross’ businesses and the non-profit Cooper University Health Care that he runs.
“George Norcross has been running a criminal enterprise in this state for at least the last twelve years,” said Matt Platkin, the New Jersey Attorney General. “On full display in this indictment is how a group of unelected, private businessmen used their power and influence to get government to aid their criminal enterprise and further its interests.”
The 111-page indictment lays out 13 specific charges against Norcross and his co-defendants, including racketeering, conspiracy to commit theft by extortion, financial facilitation of criminal activity, and official misconduct. Read the full indictment here.
Norcross’s attorney, Michael Critchley, dismissed the charges as a politically motivated hit.
This story was updated on November 21 at 9:06 AM and 10:11 AM.