Former N.J. Assemblyman Van Pelt denies taking $10K bribe from FBI informant

Van Pelt says he believed money was consultant fee payment for development project

Matt Rainey/The Star-LedgerFormer N.J. Assemblyman Daniel Van Pelt leaves federal court during his corruption trial. He is accused of taking a $10,000 bribe from an FBI informant. Van Pelt took the stand in his own defense today.

OCEAN COUNTY -- For the first time since his arrest last July, former Assemblyman Daniel Van Pelt spoke publicly today about federal corruption charges against him by denying he used his political influence to help a corrupt real estate developer, insisting the $10,000 he accepted was a consulting fee.

Called as the first defense witness in his trial, the ex-lawmaker repeatedly told jurors during his three hours of testimony there was no reason for him to accept a $10,000 bribe because his influence wasn’t needed on a permit application.

Much of the testimony of Van Pelt, a former mayor and committeeman in Ocean Township, was devoted to his work to attain special state designation for a redevelopment area there. He also spent a good portion of his time on the witness stand explaining potentially incriminating comments secretly recorded by the developer — who turned out to be government witness Solomon Dwek.

"Did you sit down with any state agency for this application?" his attorney, Robert Fuggi Jr., asked toward the end of his direct examination.

"Absolutely not," Van Pelt said.

Dressed in a black suit and a chartreuse tie, Van Pelt was composed during his testimony and appeared relaxed when discussing the redevelopment project on which he spent seven years working. His wife, attorney Stacey Kerr, sat in the gallery of the sparsely-attended trial before U.S. District Judge Joel Pisano in Trenton.

Captured on video tape accepting $10,000 in cash from Dwek on Feb. 21, 2009, Van Pelt said he was shocked when he received an envelope stuffed with $100 bills.

"I accepted the envelope. Everyone saw the tape," Van Pelt said, referring to the jurors’ viewing of the tape last week, which he said prompted him to seek advice from the state Assembly’s ethics counsel. "I knew it was a retainer of some kind."

Federal prosecutors contend the consulting claim is a ruse and that Van Pelt knew the money was a bribe. Supporting that claim, Assistant U.S. Attorney Rachael Honig said in her opening arguments, are bank records showing Van Pelt deposited the cash in two separate transactions, which she argued was his way of avoiding bank notification requirements of deposits in excess of $10,000.

Van Pelt did not address that issue during his time on the stand today. Assistant U.S. Attorney Dustin Chao is scheduled conduct Van Pelt’s cross-examination this morning.

Dwek testified that Van Pelt joked about calling himself Dwek’s consultant before accepting the money.

But Van Pelt said today he laughed during that Feb. 11, 2009, conversation because he was uncomfortable asking a man he barely knew for a consulting job.

He said he planned in mid-2008 to resign from the township committee at the beginning of 2009 and sought guidance from Marci Hochman, general ethics counsel to the state Assembly, on making a transition from the public sector to working in the private sector as a development consultant.

He said he also suggested he and Dwek draw up a consultant’s agreement but he acquiesced to Dwek’s refusal to do so.

"I certainly tried to suggest to him we probably should have something in writing," Van Pelt said. "I thought it really was a legitimate business opportunity.…I really thought it was an opportunity for me to play a role to be a part of something I worked on for so long and wanted to see through to fruition."

Secret video camera captures assemblyman Van Pelt accepting an envelope of cash