Orie seeks to shield pension, campaign cash
Allegheny County prosecutors should not be allowed to touch the pension contributions or campaign account of former state Sen. Jane Orie in their bid to collect restitution from her theft convictions, her attorney said Wednesday.
William Costopoulos filed a six-page motion in Allegheny County Common Pleas Court and attached more than 80 pages of exhibits detailing Orie's rejection of cost-of-living increases for herself as well as her vote against the 2006 controversial pay raise for lawmakers.
Costopoulos also wrote that her theft convictions "are in the $25,000 range" with a guideline sentence that ranges from probation to nine to 18 months in jail. That's a sharp contrast to prosecutors' requests for restitution that could total more than $2 million and a jail sentence that could range from probation up to 94 months, or almost eight years, in the standard range.
Costopoulos argued that the bulk of the prosecution's $2 million restitution request was money spent by the Senate Republican Caucus for its own representation and that Orie should not be liable for that.
Orie, 50, of McCandless, is scheduled to be sentenced Monday on her 14 convictions, including five felonies, for using her staff to do campaign work on state time and using forged documents as evidence in her first trial, which ended in a mistrial.
Prosecutors have said in court filings that Orie's state pension fund contributions total about $90,000, and that her campaign fund contains more than $100,000.
A spokesman for District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. declined to comment.
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.