Witnesses in the medical kickback case against Dr. Felix Roque, the mayor of West New York, were co-defendants seeking leniency, with prior convictions, conflicting statements or immigration issues
HACKENSACK -- The judge in the commercial bribery case against physician and West New York Mayor Felix Roque spent much of his jury charge Wednesday morning listing reasons why jurors could discount the testimony of prosecution witnesses, particularly an MRI lab operator hoping to receive a lighter sentence for his own guilty plea and even avoid deportation.
Roque, a pain specialist with a practice in the Hudson County town where he is in his second term as mayor, is charged with taking more than $200,000 in kickbacks from the lab operator, Rehan Zuberi of Boonton, in exchange for referring patients for MRIs and other procedures to Zuberi's Hackensack lab, American Imaging Affiliates. Prosecutors say Roque made more than 2,000 referrals to the lab over several years starting in 2007.
Arguments in the two-week trial in state Superior Court in Hackensack concluded Tuesday afternoon. And on Wednesday morning, Judge Christopher Kazlau spent about half an hour on his jury charge, explaining to the 10 women and two men on the Bergen County jury that to convict Roque of the single commercial bribery charge against him, they must conclude "beyond a reasonable doubt" that he "knowingly" accepted illicit payments in exchange for directing his patients to Zuberi's lab.
Kazlau also told jurors they could consider the credibility of witnesses including Zuberi, who pleaded guilty in the kickback scheme in May 2015. Kazlau told jurors they were entitled to discount testimony based on factors including whether the witnesses were cooperating with the state, their criminal histories, or their interest in the outcome of the case against Roque, including as it related to their own sentencing or even their immigration status.
For example, Kazlau reminded jurors that they had heard in the course of arguments that Zuberi, a native of Pakastan, was in the United States illegally and that in exchange for his testimony the prosecution had agreed to aid in Zuberi's immigration case.
Zuberi's immigration status on its own should not merit special scrutiny of his testimony, Kazlau cautioned. But, the judge added, the possibility that Zuberi's testimony could help him avoid deportation should.
Indeed, at least five witnesses in the case, including Zuberi and his wife, Humara Paracha, were so-called cooperating witnesses, testifying for the state under a plea agreement.
"The law requires that the testimony of such witnesses be given careful scrutiny," Kazlau told jurors.
The prosecution and defense downplayed the impact the jury charge, noting that the language used by the judge, except when referring to specific witnesses, was fairly standard and proscribed largely by court guidelines.
However, Roque's lawyers said it couldn't hurt that jurors were reminded of witnesses' interests the case immediately before beginning their deliberations.
And even the state's lead prosecutor, Deputy Attorney General Peter Sepulveda, acknowledged that Zuberi's immigration status was an uncommon factor that jurors would weigh in assessing his credibility.
One of Roque's lawyers, John McDonald, said Zuberi was the only prosecution witness he could recall with five discounting factors: that he was a cooperating witness; that he was cooperating as a defendant in the case himself; that he had made prior conflicting statements; that he had a prior conviction; and that he faced possible deportation.
Then again, none of that might end up making a difference, McDonald added.
"I've lost cases I thought I should have won," he said. "I've won cases I thought I should have lost."
Steve Strunsky may be reached at sstrunsky@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @SteveStrunsky. Find NJ.com on Facebook.