U.S. v. Pabey

In prosecution on charge alleging that defendant-mayor conspired to embezzle city funds where defendant used city workers and city funds to renovate house located in different city and owned by defendant, Dist. Ct. did not err in giving jury "ostrich" instruction that addressed defendant's claim that he was unaware that city workers or city funds were used on his house. To extent that defendant was unaware of use of said funds or workers, record contained sufficient evidence to establish that defendant deliberately avoided truth about use of said workers or funds so as to justify said instruction where: (1) defendant acted differently with respect to renovation of instant house, as opposed to prior renovations of other properties in which defendant had directly paid for work performed by said workers during their off hours; (2) defendant avoided looking at receipts that workers placed in envelope that was kept at subject house; and (3) defendant failed to confront known city workers, who were performing work on instant house during city's normal business hours.