European Court Convicts Jurado

A Harvard graduate and former research associate affiliated with the Kennedy School of Government and the Law School was found guilty of laundering drug money by a Luxembourg court on Thursday.

Jose Franklin Jurado Rodriguez '69-70, a native of Colombia and former resident of Dunster House, was sentenced to four years and six months in prison and ordered to pay a fine of nearly $150,000 by a panel of three judges, The Wall Street Journal reported Friday.

An associate of Jurado's was sentenced to five years in prison and fined $300,000, while a third defendant was acquitted based on insufficient evidence, the Journal reported.

Jurado, who concentrated in economics while at Harvard, was convicted under a 1989 law designed to stem the flow of illegally-earned money into the country's banking system. He and his partners were charged with laundering money on behalf of several cocaine kingpins.

But Jurado's lawyer, contacted by The Crimson yesterday in Brussels, said his client was not managing drug money, and that if he was, Jurado did not know it at the time.

Speaking in French, the lawyer, Jean-Pierre Buyle, said that Jurado was innocent and that the trial was unfair.

"It was a political judgment," Buyle said. "Luxembourg is a small country in financial distress and [the government] is scared to be entangled with drugmoney."

Calling Jurado "an exceptional individual,"Buyle said he filed an appeal immediately afterthe verdict was handed down. But the attorney saidhe does not expect the decision to be reversed,adding that he will appeal to the Strasbourg Courton Human Rights, where he said an acquittal ismore likely.

Friends and associates of Jurado in Cambridgeexpressed surprise at the verdict yesterday.

Lecturer in Public Policy Mark A. R. Kleiman,who worked with Jurado for several months in thelate 1980's, said his friend told him that he hadfought against the growing financial influence ofdrug cartels while setting up a stock exchange inColombia in the first half of the decade.

Kleiman, who testified for Jurado before theLuxembourg court, said he thinks that what he sawof the prosecution's evidence was weak and thatthe judges were prejudiced against Jurado.

"Based on the process I saw in Luxembourg, thefact that he was convicted doesn't do very much tochange my belief that he's probably innocent,"said Kleiman, an expert in criminal justice at theKennedy School.

"I had the strong impression that the presidentof the court had already made up her mindthat...the defendants were guilty and regarded thepresence of defense lawyers and defense witnessesas an intrusion into what should have been asimple process of convicting everybody and sendingthem off to prison," he added.

Kleiman said he would probably testify again onJurado's behalf if asked to do so by the defense.

"If he was guilty, I'm extremely sorry to hearthat my friend Franklin Jurado took the wrongroad," Kleiman said. "If he's not guilty, I'm evenmore distressed."

Adi Krause contributed to the reporting ofthis story.

Calling Jurado "an exceptional individual,"Buyle said he filed an appeal immediately afterthe verdict was handed down. But the attorney saidhe does not expect the decision to be reversed,adding that he will appeal to the Strasbourg Courton Human Rights, where he said an acquittal ismore likely.

Friends and associates of Jurado in Cambridgeexpressed surprise at the verdict yesterday.

Lecturer in Public Policy Mark A. R. Kleiman,who worked with Jurado for several months in thelate 1980's, said his friend told him that he hadfought against the growing financial influence ofdrug cartels while setting up a stock exchange inColombia in the first half of the decade.

Kleiman, who testified for Jurado before theLuxembourg court, said he thinks that what he sawof the prosecution's evidence was weak and thatthe judges were prejudiced against Jurado.

"Based on the process I saw in Luxembourg, thefact that he was convicted doesn't do very much tochange my belief that he's probably innocent,"said Kleiman, an expert in criminal justice at theKennedy School.

"I had the strong impression that the presidentof the court had already made up her mindthat...the defendants were guilty and regarded thepresence of defense lawyers and defense witnessesas an intrusion into what should have been asimple process of convicting everybody and sendingthem off to prison," he added.

Kleiman said he would probably testify again onJurado's behalf if asked to do so by the defense.

"If he was guilty, I'm extremely sorry to hearthat my friend Franklin Jurado took the wrongroad," Kleiman said. "If he's not guilty, I'm evenmore distressed."

Adi Krause contributed to the reporting ofthis story.