Lawyers in N.R.A. Trial Deliver Closing Arguments, Sending Case to Jury
The case, brought by the New York attorney general, Letitia James, accused leaders of the National Rifle Association of corruption and misspending.
Over the last six weeks, lawyers for New York’s attorney general, Letitia James, have outlined a case that paints the N.R.A. as a mismanaged organization with little fealty to its mission of defending the Second Amendment or to the gun owners who prize that right. Monica Connell, representing the attorney general’s office, began her closing arguments on Thursday by comparing the defendants to children who grabbed cookies from a jar and were “caught with crumbs on their face and on their shirt.”
Central to the case has been the state’s depiction of the group’s former longtime leader, Wayne LaPierre, as a lavish spender who used N.R.A. funds to pay for private jets, luxury vacations, and the occasional spin on a superyacht.
“This case is about corruption: Misuse of funds spent on jets, black cars, five-star hotels, hundreds of thousands of dollars of suits, million-dollar deals to insiders, payments to loyal board members and pervasive violations of internal controls,” Ms. Connell said to the nearly full courtroom in Manhattan.
The jury is expected to begin deliberations on Friday.
Mr. LaPierre, 74, stepped down just before the New York trial commenced, ending more than three decades as the head of the organization. He had nonetheless testified in the case, conceding to pricey trips and other perks. He also spent many days in the front row the courtroom, as government lawyers — and even his own — described his sometimes troubled leadership of the group.
Along with Mr. LaPierre, the defendants included John Frazer, the N.R.A.’s general counsel; Woody Phillips, a former finance chief; and the N.R.A. itself.
Ms. James is seeking tens of millions of dollars in damages and to bar the individual defendants from working in nonprofit organizations in New York. Ms. James has special jurisdiction over the N.R.A. because it was chartered as a nonprofit in New York 148 years ago.
“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
So, after all the mealy-mouthed end of the trial plays out and the extended appeal process runs its course, it'll be like 2124 before an actual end to the case will happen.
"Mickey Mouse and I grew up together." - Ruthie Tompson, Disney animation checker and scene planner and one of the first women to become a member of the International Photographers Union in 1952.
RTH10260 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2024 9:42 pm
"restitution" - does that mean the $$$ flow back to the N.R.A.?
What about the dissolution of the N.R.A., is that a separate proceeding?
Yeah, he has to pay back the NRA.
The jury also said that the NRA failed to adopt a whistleblower policy that complied with state law and failed to act on whistleblower complaints and filed state-required reports with false and misleading information.
"Mickey Mouse and I grew up together." - Ruthie Tompson, Disney animation checker and scene planner and one of the first women to become a member of the International Photographers Union in 1952.
The judge ruled against dissolution a good while ago.
And remember, dissolution under the Attorney General's supervisory authority over non-profits would not have meant forfeiture. The court would have had an obligation to ensure that the dissolved corporation's assets were transferred to another entity that would, to the extent practicable, carry out the same purposes for which the NRA was formed.
I’m against dissolution. There are worthwhile things a properly managed NRA could do, including educational programs on gun safety and hunter safety.
"Hey! We left this England place because it was bogus, and if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too!" -- Thomas Jefferson
Slim Cognito wrote: ↑Sat Feb 24, 2024 12:04 pm
It’s hard to believe that once upon a time, the NRA was a respectable organization.
I remember it. I used to read the magazines in the bathroom at a cousin's house. I'm not a hunter, but it was interesting to read about the culture. At the time, there was a fear hunting was a dying interest, like many other traditions. So now they encourage hunting people given the weapons promoted.
The judge ruled against dissolution a good while ago. 
x4