In nearly 40 years as a lawyer, Ralph Crozier has waited for plenty of verdicts.
But never in a case that could see him sent to prison for up to four decades himself.
After a day of deliberations in his money laundering trial came and went without a verdict Wednesday, Crozier said outside the courthouse he wasn’t reading too much into the day’s developments — and is taking solace in the poetry of Rudyard Kipling.
Background
During the trial federal prosecutors alleged Crozier agreed to launder $30,000 for Bruce Yazdzik, a drug-dealing former client, in 2011, then took another $11,000 of what he knew to be drug money from Yazdzik’s mother during a DEA sting last year.
Crozier, who took the stand in his own defense, said he knew Yazdzik as a used car salesman, and figured the source of the money was Yazdzik’s legitimate business dealings.
Crozier was charged with conspiracy and attempted money laundering — the “washing” of illegally obtained money through ostensibly legitimate investments — last April, and has since been free on $200,000 bond while awaiting trial.
Chief U.S. District Judge Janet Hall brought the jury into the courtroom twice — first after the jury requested some of Crozier’s testimony read back to them, and then to give them clarification regarding one of the charges he faces — before adjourning for the day about 4 p.m.
‘Dabbling’
The jury — made up of eight men and four women — began deliberations Wednesday and discussed the case for about an hour before passing a note for Judge Hall asking for a portion of Crozier’s testimony read back to them.
The testimony concerned whether Crozier knew Yazdzik was dealing drugs, a crucial element to the government’s case. If the jury thinks Crozier reasonably believed his client’s money was clean, their verdict would have to be not guilty.
Jurors asked specifically to re-hear a portion of Crozier’s testimony where he said he told federal agents after his arrest last year that, while he didn’t think Yazdzik was a large-scale drug distributor, he conceded his client could have been “dabbling” in drug sales.
While on the stand Monday, Crozier’s lawyer, Michael Hillis, asked Crozier whether he knew prior to mid-2011 that Yazdzik’s income was derived solely from dealing prescription painkillers.
“Absolutely not,” Crozier replied.
Hillis then brought up the fact that Crozier represented Yazdzik in a 2010 case in which Yazdzik was caught with prescription painkillers on him and charged with drug dealing.
Crozier said that he figured “if anything, (Yazdzik) was dabbling in (dealing drugs).”
Count Two
The jury retired to deliberate until about 1:40 p.m., when they sent Judge Hall another note, this time asking for clarification regarding the attempted money laundering charge Crozier faces.
But Judge Hall, after conferring with lawyers on both sides of the case, told the jury their question wasn’t specific enough to answer, asking them to re-frame it with more specifics if necessary.
The jurors then retired and informed the judge they had “worked out” the issue.
‘Another Day Of Torture’
Crozier said after court was adjourned for the day that he’s not reading too much into the jury’s questions.
“It’s reading tea leaves,” he said. “You really don’t know what they mean. Your first initial fear is ‘Oh, they must have decided the first count if they’re asking (about) the second count.’ But they may not be following the instructions to do one and then the other. To guess is just to allow fear to rent space in your mind.”
“I think obviously there’s people who have differing thoughts in the matter, otherwise they would have come back quickly one way or another,” Crozier said of the deliberations. “Bottom line, I have another day of torture and I look forward to being acquitted.”
He also said he wasn’t reading too much into the length of the jury’s deliberations.
“I’ve had people out for four days with a guilty and four days with an acquittal,” Crozier said.
But he added: “If it were an easy case — ‘Oh my gosh, Ralph’s a liar, he clearly knew what this was’ — I think they’d back today before lunch.”
Throughout the trial, Crozier has seemed remarkably at ease, far from a person worried about facing up to 40 years behind bars.
Asked why, he quoted the first line of “If — ,” a poem by Rudyard Kipling advising readers to “keep your head when all about you/Are losing theirs.”
“My theory is real simple: being upset about it and letting it take a hold of you and causing problems is just a way for an early death,” Crozier said.
The jury will resume deliberations Thursday morning.
Click here to read about the first day of the trial.
Click here to read about the second day of the trial.
Click here to read about the third day of the trial.
Click here to read about the fourth day of the trial.
Click here to read about the fifth day of the trial.
