ILNews

Feds indict East Chicago mayor, former official

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Another East Chicago mayor is now being charged in the federal court for alleged misuse of public money, and defense attorneys say they'll go to trial to fight the charges.

Acting U.S. Attorney David Capp for the Northern District of Indiana Wednesday filed a grand jury indictment in the Hammond courthouse, charging East Chicago Mayor George Pabey and former city engineering department leader Jose Camacho with conspiring to divert city money and resources toward improving a house that Pabey owns with his daughter in Gary's Miller Beach neighborhood. Camacho is also charged with trying to persuade other city workers to lie to federal investigators about work the laborers allegedly did on the house while they were on the clock for the city, the indictment says.

In the 10-page indictment, prosecutors allege that Pabey used public money to do work on a Gary home bought as a foreclosure in late 2007. The indictment says that between late 2007 and August 2008, a crew of four "skilled laborers" supervised by Camacho worked on the home by pouring concrete, painting, and installing new appliances and furnishings. Camacho's accused of spending more than $5,000 in taxpayer money on materials for the project, and he also drew on an engineering department account. Once FBI agents starting investigating, Camacho told the other workers to either keep quiet or lie to the agents, according to the indictment.

The indictment accuses Pabey of two counts: a conspiracy charge and a charge that specifically accuses him of illegally diverting the city resources. Camacho faces the same charges and two counts of witness tampering.

East Chicago spokesman Damian Rico issued a statement Wednesday, saying the mayor did "nothing improper or illegal," that the allegations are false, and that Pabey has fully cooperated with federal investigators.

"I am shocked beyond expression that these allegations have been made by the government," Pabey said in the statement. "I will not be distracted by this event in continuing to conduct the business of my office on behalf of the people of East Chicago."

Gary attorney Fred Work and Merrillville attorney Scott King, a former Gary mayor, are serving as defense counsel.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Andrew Rodovich set a signature bond at $20,000 for both Pabey and Camacho, and lawyers stated to the media at the courthouse they anticipated going to trial.

Pabey took over as mayor in 2005 after outsting longtime political force Robert Pastrick in an Indiana Supreme Court-ordered special election. Pastrick went on to be the subject of a civil racketeering suit that's still pending before U.S. Senior Judge James Moody in Hammond. The Indiana Attorney General's Office declined to speak about that ongoing litigation, or what effect this federal case could have on that litigation.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. No second amendment, pro life, pro traditional marriage, reagan or trump tshirts will be sold either. And you cannot draw Mohammed even in your own notebook. And you must wear a helmet at all times while at the fair. And no lawyer jokes can be told except in the designated protest area. And next year no crucifixes, since they are uber offensive to all but Catholics. Have a nice bland day here in the Lego movie. Remember ... Everything is awesome comrades.

  2. Thank you for this post . I just bought a LG External DVD It came with Cyber pwr 2 go . It would not play on Lenovo Idea pad w/8.1 . Your recommended free VLC worked great .

  3. All these sites putting up all the crap they do making Brent Look like A Monster like he's not a good person . First off th fight actually started not because of Brent but because of one of his friends then when the fight popped off his friend ran like a coward which left Brent to fend for himself .It IS NOT a crime to defend yourself 3 of them and 1 of him . just so happened he was a better fighter. I'm Brent s wife so I know him personally and up close . He's a very caring kind loving man . He's not abusive in any way . He is a loving father and really shouldn't be where he is not for self defense . Now because of one of his stupid friends trying to show off and turning out to be nothing but a coward and leaving Brent to be jumped by 3 men not only is Brent suffering but Me his wife , his kids abd step kidshis mom and brother his family is left to live without him abd suffering in more ways then one . that man was and still is my smile ....he's the one real thing I've ever had in my life .....f@#@ You Lafayette court system . Learn to do your jobs right he maybe should have gotten that year for misdemeanor battery but that s it . not one person can stand to me and tell me if u we're in a fight facing 3 men and u just by yourself u wouldn't fight back that you wouldn't do everything u could to walk away to ur family ur kids That's what Brent is guilty of trying to defend himself against 3 men he wanted to go home tohisfamily worse then they did he just happened to be a better fighter and he got the best of th others . what would you do ? Stand there lay there and be stomped and beaten or would u give it everything u got and fight back ? I'd of done the same only I'm so smallid of probably shot or stabbed or picked up something to use as a weapon . if it was me or them I'd do everything I could to make sure I was going to live that I would make it hone to see my kids and husband . I Love You Brent Anthony Forever & Always .....Soul 1 baby

  4. Good points, although this man did have a dog in the legal fight as that it was his mother on trial ... and he a dependent. As for parking spaces, handicap spots for pregnant women sure makes sense to me ... er, I mean pregnant men or women. (Please, I meant to include pregnant men the first time, not Room 101 again, please not Room 101 again. I love BB)

  5. I have no doubt that the ADA and related laws provide that many disabilities must be addressed. The question, however, is "by whom?" Many people get dealt bad cards by life. Some are deaf. Some are blind. Some are crippled. Why is it the business of the state to "collectivize" these problems and to force those who are NOT so afflicted to pay for those who are? The fact that this litigant was a mere spectator and not a party is chilling. What happens when somebody who speaks only East Bazurkistanish wants a translator so that he can "understand" the proceedings in a case in which he has NO interest? Do I and all other taxpayers have to cough up? It would seem so. ADA should be amended to provide a simple rule: "Your handicap, YOUR problem". This would apply particularly to handicapped parking spaces, where it seems that if the "handicap" is an ingrown toenail, the government comes rushing in to assist the poor downtrodden victim. I would grant wounded vets (IED victims come to mind in particular) a pass on this.. but others? Nope.

ADVERTISEMENT