Rubino Jurors Given Legal Clarifications

On their third day of deliberations, jurors in the trial of ex-Budget Director Ronald S. Rubino on Friday received some clarifications about the legal meaning of the terms “aiding and abetting.”

Rubino is charged with two felony counts of aiding and abetting former Treasurer-Tax Collector Robert L. Citron skim nearly $100 million in interest earnings belonging to agencies in Orange County’s ill-fated investment pool.

Responding to jurors’ request for a clarification of the terms, Judge J. Stephen Czuleger said that in order to find Rubino guilty, jurors must find beyond a reasonable doubt that Citron committed the crimes for which Rubino is charged.

They must also find that Rubino, “with the specific intent to do so,” helped Citron commit those crimes, the judge said.

“Aiding and abetting requires that Rubino knew that the crime charged was being committed, knowingly did some act for the purpose of aiding, promoting, encouraging or instigating the crime, and did so with the intention of causing a crime,” the judge’s clarification stated.

After receiving the clarification, jurors asked a court reporter to read back portions of Rubino’s testimony. They deliberated but did not arrive at a decision.

Citron has pleaded guilty to money-skimming and fraud charges and awaits sentencing.

During Rubino’s trial, Citron testified that he never told the former budget director about the illegal diversion.

Rubino also insisted in his own testimony that he did not know Citron’s office was diverting interest earnings to a treasury account to plug a gaping hole in the county’s budget because of state funding cutbacks.

Rubino, his wife, Sharon Esterley, and daughter Michele spent the third consecutive day waiting alternately outside the courtroom and in the courthouse’s cafeteria for the jury’s verdict.