Judge denies Jones' motion
By Ethan Smith
Published in News on August 17, 2016 1:46 PM
A motion to dismiss part of an indictment against Superior Court Judge Arnold Jones was denied by a federal judge Monday.
A federal indictment against Jones for allegedly bribing a Federal Bureau of Investigation task force officer to obtain copies of text messages between his wife and another man was handed down on Nov. 3, 2015.
The three-count indictment alleges that Jones promised a payment of a bribe to a public official, promised a payment of a gratuity to a public official and attempted to corruptly influence an official proceeding.
Attorneys representing Jones made a motion to dismiss the count of the indictment against Jones that alleges Jones attempted to corruptly influence an official proceeding, saying there was a failure to state an offense in the third count of the indictment.
In the same motion, Jones' attorneys also requested to require the federal government to choose between prosecuting the other two counts of the indictment prior to the trial pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
On Monday, Senior United States District Judge James C. Fox struck down that motion and denied the motion to dismiss the count of the indictment that alleges Jones attempted to corruptly influence an official proceeding, and also denied the motion to require the federal government choose between the other two counts of the indictment.
According to documents filed on July 26 that detail the government's response in opposition to the motion to dismiss the count of the indictment that alleges Jones attempted to corruptly influence an official proceeding, Jones "believed that his wife was having an affair -- and he was willing to abuse his knowledge of the court system and his access to law enforcement officers to find out."
The documents say Jones was informed a search warrant was required to obtain his wife's texts, and then "corruptly sought to obtain one."
According to the documents, the text messages Jones attempted to obtain were between his wife and another man that lives outside of North Carolina that is not related to Jones or his wife.
"Despite knowledge that there was no criminal investigation of his wife, and no reason to suspect that his wife's phone or texts constituted criminal evidence of any kind, the defendant (Jones) contacted an FBI Task Force Officer and asked him to obtain and deliver the text messages," the documents say.
The documents then go on to allege that Jones continued to seek out the text messages knowing that the FBI officer would be proceeding in front of a federal magistrate judge on "axiomatically fraudulent grounds" and agreed to pay the FBI officer for the deed.
Jones then allegedly arranged to meet the FBI officer on Nov. 3, 2015, and pay him $100 in exchange for a disk containing the text messages.
"Consummating the deal, the defendant, dressed in his black judicial robe, paid the FBI officer $100 for the texts on the steps of the Wayne County Courthouse," the documents read.
According to the documents, the encounter was captured on "devices capable of recording video and audio signals."
The documents go on to say that Jones attempted to access text messages purportedly on the disk throughout the day of Nov. 3, 2015, seeking technical assistance from an unnamed individual.
Jones was unable to access or receive any unlawfully-obtained text messages, the documents say.
"On the morning of November 4, 2015, at the time of his arrest, an FBI agent asked Jones the whereabouts of the disk, stating, 'Where is my CD judge?' Jones responded, 'CD?' The FBI agent then confronted Jones with a still image taken at the time Jones exchanged the cash for the disk and stated, 'This is yesterday where you paid us $100 for the CD.' Jones responded, 'That's not what I did, but ok,'" the documents read.
According to another set of documents also filed on July 26 in response to the motion to require the federal government to choose between counts one and two of the indictment, doing so would "unfairly deprive the trial jury of an opportunity to reach conviction in a case where the jury may find the defendant guilty of one offense, but not the other."
Jones was scheduled to appear in federal court in Wilmington on Thursday, but that appearance has been continued to Sept. 13, said one of Jones' attorneys, Geoff Hulse, when reached by phone late Tuesday morning.
Hulse said Jones' trial is still scheduled for Sept. 19, and the court date on Sept. 13 is for pre-trial motions that will determine what evidence is allowed to be used in the case.
Hulse said Thursday's appearance was continued to Sept. 13 because the federal government wanted more time to respond to pre-trial motions.