A federal jury on Thursday convicted a sports media and marketing company and a former 21st Century Fox executive for taking part in a multimillion-dollar bribery scheme to secure broadcasting rights for South American soccer matches.
The jurors handed down their verdict after 31/2 days of deliberation, finding the Uruguay-based Full Play sports marketing company, and former CEO of Fox International Channels Sports Hernan Lopez guilty of wire fraud and money laundering charges. Ex-Fox executive Carlos Martinez was acquitted.
U.S. Attorney Breon Peace called the verdict ” resounding victory for justice and for soccer fans around the world.”
The jury’s decision came after a winding, seven-week trial which featured 11 days of testimony from a single witness, former Latin American soccer TV executive Alejandro Burzaco.
“Year after year, bribe after bribe, millions upon millions of dollars. People who paid the bribes were sports marketing executives and their businesses,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Silverberg said during his closing argument.
“Plain and simple, they cheated. Full Play cheated for greed. They boxed out their competitors to help them generate valuable business. Hernan Lopez and Carlos Martinez cheated for power, they cheated for opportunity, and they cheated for status within the industry and their own organization.”
Over the course of his marathon run on the witness stand, Burzaco said the two former Fox Sports executives paid up to $32 million between 2010 and 2015, leading to Fox Latin America cornering the market.
Burzaco, who ran a sports licensing company called Torneo, laid out the scheme by Full Play to bribe officials with the South American Football Federation known as CONMEBOL.
He also described how he partnered with Lopez and Martinez to funnel money to soccer executives.
Full Play’s lawyer, Carlos Ortiz, said the company never received CONMEBOL’s code of ethics, and thought they were just doing business as expected.
“All of these executives and officers acted in a manner and behaved and carried themselves in a manner that sent a clear, strong message that their receipts of payments were totally fine, because they did and they requested it,” Ortiz said.
Lopez’s lawyer, David Sarratt, argued that the government’s case against his client hinged on Burzaco, who he referred to as a “smooth” mastermind who managed to persuade the government into letting his family keep $100 million he had a Swiss trust fund.
“You heard from Mr. Burzaco for a long time, but I have to imagine that after that, you went home every night during this trial thinking there must be somebody else,” Sarratt said. “Surely there’s going to be more than this one guy. And you kept going home, and you kept coming back, and there was nobody else. Nobody else.”
Martinez beamed as he stood outside the courtroom, and his lawyer, Steven McCool, praised the jurors.
“We’re just tremendously grateful to the members of the jury for bringing justice to Carlos,” he said. “It’s been a long road and we really appreciate their efforts.
One juror, Willie, 68, of Queens, said the panel put together list to determine if the defendants were guilty, and primarily relied on document evidence, using Burzaco’s testimony sparingly at best.
“Full Play, they came in and said they were guilty. That was easy,” he said.
When asked if Burzaco was a credible witness, the juror glibly answered, “No.”
Martinez was acquitted, Willie said, because, “He came in late. By the time he came, everything was already in place.”
As for Lopez, “He was the CEO, so he should have known better.”
Brooklyn Federal Court Judge Pamela Chen rejected a request by prosecutors to keep Lopez locked up before his sentencing. He’s free on $15 million bond. Lopez is a U.S. and Argentine citizen, and he lives in Los Angeles with his husband and his young, adopted son and daughter in a newly bought house.
Chen said she’d add the new house to the surety on his bond, saying, “I have no reason to believe he’s going to abandon his children.”
Lopez’s lawyer, John Gleason, vowed to appeal the verdict.
“We’re obviously disappointed with the jury’s verdict. The proceedings have involved both legal and factual errors, and we look forward to vindicating our client on appeal,” he said.
