Richard Juliano:
The Consequences of Public Corruption: An Insider’s View
Biographical Background
Richard Juliano’s recounting of his experiences in politics, government and the legal system make a compelling story that every young person in those fields should hear. As a cooperating witness in one of Illinois’ highest-profile public corruption cases, he provides a unique insider’s view of the political and legal process, as well as an admonition for anyone confronted with ethical dilemmas in the workplace.
Over a political and governmental career of nearly 15 years, Juliano worked on political campaigns at all levels and held key positions in both state and federal government. He is a native of Cleveland, Ohio, and graduate of the University of Chicago college and law school. While still in his 20’s, Juliano spent most of his early professional years working in the free-wheeling world of Illinois politics for former Secretary of State and Governor George H. Ryan. For several years, Juliano’s direct supervisor and political mentor was Scott R. Fawell, Ryan’s chief of staff and campaign manager. Juliano’s efforts were important to Ryan’s success in the statewide elections of 1990, 1994 and 1998.
Called a “rising political star” in the Chicago media, Juliano culminated his Illinois campaign experience by running the state’s Bush-Cheney operation in 2000. The new presidential administration enabled Juliano – by then in his mid-30’s – to leave the Illinois political environment in 2001 and relocate to Washington, D.C., where he served in the office of former U.S. Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta as the department’s White House liaison, including during and after the tragic events of September 11, 2001.
Juliano had thus achieved his lifelong dream of working as a political professional and serving in a presidential administration. However, fulfillment of this dream was to be brief. Just months after Juliano assumed his position in Washington, federal investigators contacted him to seek his cooperation in the Operation Safe Road investigation. The probe, which had originally focused on corruption at Illinois Secretary of State drivers license facilities in the 1990’s, had since expanded to include Ryan campaign and fundraising activities that had taken place under Fawell’s direction. Juliano provided full and truthful cooperation to federal prosecutors upon being contacted and was eventually charged with one count of felony mail fraud relating to the misuse of official state resources for political purposes. Juliano resigned from the U.S. Department of Transportation in March 2002, and was charged and pled guilty the next month as part of a larger indictment that included Fawell and the Ryan campaign committee.
In many ways, the guilty plea was just the beginning of Juliano’s legal journey. Operation Safe Road continued to expand and eventually yielded convictions and lengthy prison sentences for Ryan, Fawell and several of their top advisors. Juliano’s cooperation continued for almost five years following his plea, including dozens of lengthy interviews and a combined ten days on the witness stand in two major trials, during which he was cross-examined by nationally-known defense lawyers and his every word scrutinized by the media.
With the investigation finally winding down, U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer sentenced Juliano in October 2006 to four years of probation (including three months of home detention), a $10,000 fine and 350 hours of community service. During the hearing, Assistant U.S. Attorney Patrick Collins praised Juliano’s extensive cooperation in the case, saying that he had been “loyal only to the truth,” and took the unusual step of urging Judge Pallmeyer to impose a lenient sentence to make Juliano an example for others who might consider cooperating in public corruption investigations. Both Judge Pallmeyer and Collins noted that Juliano had proven his genuine remorse through his unparalleled, timely and truthful cooperation.
Undoubtedly Juliano has paid a heavy price for his complicity in Ryan and Fawell’s wrongdoing. He and his young family have endured years of uncertainty, embarrassment and emotional stress. The mail fraud conviction remains a serious blot on his personal record, he is no longer licensed to practice law (with no guarantee that privilege will be restored) and he has incurred substantial legal fees.
Yet Juliano’s family life has remained strong and he has successfully rebuilt his career in the private sector. Since leaving federal government service in 2002, he has worked as a national trade association executive based in the Nation’s Capital. Juliano credits his commitment to telling the truth, both regarding his own conduct and that of others during the Ryan-Fawell years, as a major factor in realizing his professional “second chance.”
Presentation by Richard Juliano and Hank Shea
Today, Richard Juliano is willing to share his story with audiences of law students, business students, aspiring political professionals and other interested groups. Juliano makes joint appearances with Hank Shea, a former Assistant U.S. Attorney and Fellow at the University of St. Thomas School of Law’s Holloran Center for Ethical Leadership in the Professions. Through a question and answer format, Shea and Juliano look back on the events that precipitated the Operation Safe Road investigation, key ethical dilemmas raised for Juliano and his former colleagues along the way, and the consequences of picking the wrong mentor. While Shea uses his own unique expertise to lead the discussion and provide commentary, Juliano hopes to show how easy it is for a young, ambitious person to fall into ethical traps. He seeks to provide what he never had – a cautionary tale to keep in mind when facing day-to-day, seemingly routine moral decisions in professional life. Audience comments and questions are also welcome when appropriate.
“Lessons Learned” from Juliano
Juliano stresses three lessons or operative “rules” he hopes young professionals will take away from his presentation. First, a red flag should be raised every time a questionable practice is justified on the basis that “others are doing it.” Second, everyone should assume that everything they do in a professional setting will be scrutinized one day — the “light of day” test. While the chances are typically remote that the authorities or media will do so, everyone should be prepared to defend their actions should that level of scrutiny ever take place. Lastly, Juliano warns students and young professionals about the dangers of associating with a bad role model or mentor, a “toxic boss” such as the one in his own experience. He encourages his audiences to build the self-confidence necessary to extricate themselves from these types of situations — even if it means giving up the “dream” job. As Juliano can attest, choosing to avoid short-term inconveniences can lead to long-term repercussions that can be devastating.
Juliano also makes the important point that if one ends up in the middle of an investigation or legal situation, it is imperative to tell the truth. It is well known that cover-ups, perjury and obstruction of justice often constitute worse conduct than the underlying offense being investigated. Juliano credits his candor with enabling him to move beyond his legal travails and not letting it define his personal and professional life.
These and other valuable lessons on ethics can be learned from Richard Juliano’s story.
To schedule a presentation with Hank Shea and Richard Juliano, please contact: hjshea@stthomas.edu.
"Rich Juliano came to my White Collar Crime class at Stanford Law School. I teach full time at Stanford Law School and have taught the class on White Collar Crime for many years.
My students react thoughtfully to speakers and we have forthright, no holds barred, discussions about the value of the presentation following the class. Rich Juliano spoke honestly and without defensiveness about his experience and while expressing remorse for his behavior, did not at all attempt to white wash or excuse his behavior.
My students benefited enormously from his presentation because they could see how someone could so easily step over the line which separates proper and improper ethical behavior and how easily one can get caught up in improper behavior.
After the class, the response from my students to Rich was overwhelmingly positive and they felt they learned a great deal from the presentation. We would gladly have Rich come back to present to my class again if he had the interest and the inclination.
I would unreservedly call it a total success and we are very appreciative that he was willing to come to Stanford and speak frankly and thoughtfully about his experiences."
David Mills
Senior Lecturer at Law, Stanford Law School
