ILNews

Grand jury indicts recycler for racketeering

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Marion County grand jury has returned an eight-count indictment against OmniSource Corp., accusing the metal recycling powerhouse of racketeering and receiving stolen property.

OmniSource, a unit of Fort Wayne-based Steel Dynamics Inc., is charged with buying stolen cars, car parts, boats, gutters, wiring and other items as scrap metal prices climbed between June 2007 and May 2009.

In a statement, OmniSource president Mark Millett called the allegations "unfounded," saying the company is an industry leader in "anti-theft training and law enforcement cooperation." The company hired more than 50 Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department officers to help detect and deter metal theft.

"This indictment of OmniSource is not only unfair to the company but an insult to the IMPD police officers who ... did their part to stop metal thefts in Marion County,” he said in the statement.

Officers from the IMPD, FBI, Indiana State Police and other agencies raided the six Indianapolis scrap yards operated by OmniSource in February 2009, collecting evidence and seizing property and more than $277,000. The raids were the culmination of a year-long undercover investigation.

The grand jury returned the 16-page indictment Oct. 22, and it was filed in Marion Circuit Court on Monday.

OmniSource is charged with three counts of corrupt business influence and five counts of attempted receipt of stolen property. The indictment details dozens of allegations, which Millett said the company will "aggressively" defend itself against.

This month, the company sued Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi, seeking the return of the seized cash. OmniSource said the investigation was a sham intended to raise Brizzi’s political profile.  

As IBJ reported in April, the Prosecutor’s Office missed a deadline to file forfeiture paperwork, likely paving the way for OmniSource to reclaim the money.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  2. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  3. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT