Orange County Board Challenges Plea Deal of Andrew Do

Categories: Breaking NewsCrimeGovernment NewsNews

Community members gather to discuss concerns over local governance and accountability.

News Summary

The Orange County Board of Supervisors has voted to request a review of former Supervisor Andrew Do’s plea deal related to bribery charges involving over $10 million in federal COVID relief funds. The plea deal, criticized as too lenient by Supervisor Janet Nguyen, raises serious questions about justice and transparency. With a sentencing hearing approaching, the community is watching closely as discussions around the implications of Do’s actions and the board’s response unfold.

Orange County Board Pushes for Review of Do’s Plea Deal

In a surprising turn of events in Orange County, the Board of Supervisors recently made headlines, casting a spotlight on former Supervisor Andrew Do and his controversial plea deal related to bribery charges. The board voted 4-1 to request a review from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) concerning Do’s plea agreement, raising eyebrows and curiosity across the community.

A Closer Look at Do’s Case

In case you’re not familiar, Andrew Do pled guilty to a count of conspiracy to commit bribery, specifically involving a staggering amount exceeding $10 million in federal COVID relief funds. What’s notable here is that he was permitted to plead guilty without facing an indictment, a move that has many scratching their heads. The former supervisor is looking at a maximum of five years in federal prison, with his sentencing hearing set for June 9, 2023. It’s a date that many are marking on their calendars as they eagerly await the outcome.

Supervisor Nguyen Voices Concerns

Hot on the heels of the board’s decision to seek further investigation, Supervisor Janet Nguyen—who stepped in to replace Do—has been particularly vocal about her discontent with the terms of the plea deal. She criticized it as being remarkably lenient, especially when compared to other cases of COVID fraud and political corruption that have made the rounds in recent times. Her contention is that the plea deal doesn’t adequately address the full scope of Do’s misdeeds, especially given the allegations involving unauthorized access to privileged legal communications.

Implications for the Community

As the board outlines its position, they’ve taken on a role of advocating for the community’s interests—particularly for those constituents who suffered due to the loss of public funds. The board’s resolution underscores the need for an in-depth investigation into Do’s plea deal, claiming it raises serious questions about equal protection rights under the 14th Amendment.

It’s worth noting that Do’s actions are believed to have favored a non-profit organization associated with his daughter, Rhiannon Do. Allegations suggest that approximately $550,000 in bribes were funneled towards senior meal programs, a situation that has undoubtedly stirred local outrage.

Rhiannon and Others in the Spotlight

Interestingly, the plea agreement has also paved the way for Rhiannon Do to participate in a diversion program instead of facing her own criminal charges. This aspect has not gone unnoticed—many in the community are questioning the fairness of such an arrangement, especially in light of the serious nature of the allegations surrounding her father.

Dissenting Opinions

Amid the chatter, Supervisor Don Wagner emerged as the lone voice of dissent, arguing that the resolution unfairly cherry-picked cases for comparison. He expressed the belief that it does not represent a fair assessment of the justice system at large. Just two weeks prior, the board found itself in a deadlock over this matter, contemplating a delay for discussion before ultimately deciding to move forward.

Shining a Light on Disparities

As this situation unfolds, it’s impossible to ignore the backdrop of recent corruption cases. For instance, former Anaheim Mayor Harry Sidhu was recently sentenced to just two months in prison for his role in another related scandal. This kind of disparity in sentencing raises critical questions regarding the treatment of public officials and the inconsistencies that exist within our judicial framework.

Future Investigations on the Horizon

Experts weigh in with a hint of skepticism, suggesting that the chance of overturning Do’s plea deal is low. There are whispers that political motivations may be driving the board’s actions, especially considering Do’s background as a lawyer with ties to the justice system through family connections. Meanwhile, both Rhiannon Do and Peter Pham, alleged co-conspirators in this dubious scheme, find themselves under scrutiny in a civil suit that adds more layers to this unfolding story.

As the community watches closely, the decisions made in the coming weeks will likely reverberate far beyond the courtrooms, leaving residents eager for transparency and accountability.