Prosecutors accuse Carmel, Ind., man of accepting bribes from Springdale businessman
A Carmel, Ind., businessman committed mail fraud when he had a Fox Chapel businessman send kickbacks to a company he set up to disguise the money he stole from his employer, federal prosecutors said in court documents filed on Wednesday.
Mark M. Palombaro, a former senior vice president of Simon Property Group Inc. of Indianapolis, agreed to use his influence in 2006 and 2008 to have the company award two West Coast mall construction contracts to a Springdale construction company owned by Robert E. Crawford, 54, prosecutors say.
In return, Crawford paid Palombaro $766,000 in kickbacks. The checks went to Abby Inc., of which Palombaro was president, prosecutors say.
The charges filed Wednesday were in an information instead of an indictment, which indicates that Palombaro cooperated with investigators and plans to plead guilty.
There was no answer at Palombaro's home phone and no attorney is listed for him in court documents.
Crawford pleaded guilty in June to mail fraud and filing a false personal income tax return in June and is scheduled to be sentenced Dec. 13. At his plea hearing, he admitted to bribing Palombaro and padding the invoices he sent to Simon Property Group for work on the two projects.
Simon Property Group sued both men in 2008, and Palombaro settled his part of the lawsuit by agreeing to repay the money, according to court documents.
Brian Bowling is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-325-4301 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.