Bob Menendez was indicted for the second time in 10 years. How the new case compares to 2015

WASHINGTON - For the second time in 10 years, Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., was indicted on corruption charges, but former federal prosecutors say there are some notable differences in the cases.

At issue is whether a mix of gold bars, cash stuffed in coats, mortgage payments and more were part of some criminal activity or "the normal work of a congressional office," as Menendez claimed in a statement Friday.

Menendez has faced corruption charges before, but the previous case ended in a mistrial when a jury couldn't determine if gifts received were the result of friendship or bribery.

Prosecutors say some details stand out about this latest indictment unsealed Friday.

What is Bob Menendez accused of?

From at least 2018 to about 2022, Menendez and his wife accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes, ranging from gold bars to a Mercedez-Benz, from three businessmen to protect and enrich them and to benefit the government of Egypt, according to an indictment returned by a federal grand jury in New York.

Damian Williams, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said Menendez was also charged with trying to influence a New Jersey attorney general's investigation of a relative of one co-defendant and the federal prosecution of another co-defendant through the appointment of a U.S. attorney in New Jersey.

The last time Menendez was indicted in 2015, he was charged with receiving gifts and $660,000 in campaign contributions from a Florida eye doctor, Salomon Melgen, that helped him get reelected to the Senate in 2012. Menendez was accused of using his office to promote Melgen's business and personal interests with officials of President Barack Obama's administration.

Menendez argued the money and gifts such as luxury travel stemmed from their friendship rather than a criminal relationship. In 2017, Menendez’ corruption case ended in a mistrial after the jury could not reach a verdict and the government decided not to retry him.

How does the 2015 indictment compare to the new case?

Jurors will have to decide whether Menendez can separate the gifts and payments from any actions he took, according to legal experts.

“The previous case involved a relationship between the senator and a friend who was a physician, who was alleged to have been making improper gifts and payments in terms of hotels, flights and campaign contributions,” said Brian Whisler, a former 15-year federal prosecutor who now practices at Baker & McKenzie. “The defense was that those gifts were a product of the friendship and not a product of corrupt intent.”

Whisler contrasted Menendez’s previous case with the details of the current charges, which use texts and other communications to document payments of cash and gold bars.

“The timing of the gifts seems a little more conspicuous, if you will,” Whisler said Menendez’s current case. “I don’t get the sense that that is the conventional gesture of friendship. I think that’s partly what the prosecution is banking on.”

Marc Scholl, a former prosecutor in New York who is now counsel to the firm Lewis Baach Kaufmann & Middlemiss, said that whether the government will fare better this time depends entirely on what the government can prove.

“Unlike in the last case, here, the government is alleging substantial payments made to Menendez and his wife in the form of cash, gold bars, and other direct gifts, such as a luxury car, by three businessmen," Scholl said. "Further, the government is alleging that it has better proof of direct things that Menendez and his wife did for those who paid them."

Scholl pointed to one example in the latest indictment which alleged that Will Hana - one of the three businessmen - promised to put Menendez's partner on his company's payroll if Menendez helped the businessman facilitate lucrative financial transactions for him with Egypt, which he followed through with.

“The earlier case proved Menendez got limited stuff and that political contributions were made. But there was scant proof, it seems, that whatever Menendez did over the years for the eye doctor friend was because of the (political) contributions and gifts,” Scholl said. “Here, if the indictment can be proved, the evidence of getting stuff for doing stuff is far more brazen, direct, and clear.”

Menendez issued a statement denying wrongdoing and said prosecutors have “misrepresented the normal work of a congressional office” and made false claims against him and his wife. He added that prosecutors “wrote these charges as they wanted; the facts are not as presented.”

"The timing of it, the timing of the actions, the nature and quality of the gifts – those are going to be things that are going toward the coordination of corrupt intent or if this was pure, benign public service,” Whisler said. “That’s what people are going to have to decide.”

Scholl also noted that if the businessmen were indeed paying Menendez and his wife for doing them 'favors' then that is not constituent services, but criminal activity.

"Constituent services generally includes helping constituents cut through government bureaucratic red tape and be aware of government programs that could help them," Scholl said. "And it might include helping them make the government be aware of the constituents' achievements. But these are things the elected official is supposed to do for the constituent without asking for or receiving personal payment of gifts or contributions."

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Bob Menendez indicted twice in 10 years. How new case compares to 2015