Does Steve Wolfson Have A Conflict Of Interest Problem In Cases That Involve His Donors?
Sending someone to jail before trial, without even the possibility of posting bail and going home, is a big deal. In Las Vegas, not even people accused of murder and kidnapping are necessarily denied bail.
So one might fairly wonder why Clark County District Attorney Steve Wolfson and his prosecutors have come down so hard on R.J. Cipriani, the gambler who goes by “Robin Hood 702” and is known for sharing his winnings with the less fortunate. In January, Wolfson and his prosecutors filed a motion to jail Cipriani over a couple of tweets. Yes, tweets. True, Cipriani was already awaiting trial at the time, but only on the minor charge of taking someone’s cell phone during a dispute, a cell phone that he says contained proof that the victim, convicted fraudster Robert Alexander, had been stalking and recording Cipriani for days.
Curious as to why Wolfson would want Cipriani locked up while accused murderers and kidnappers walk free, Vegas Watch decided to take Deep Throat’s advice and “just follow the money.”
We started with Resorts World hotels and casino. That’s where Cipriani was arrested—and then banished from. In December, Resorts World gave a max donation of $10,000 to Wolfson’s campaign, and the company’s General Counsel also gave $1,000 of personal money. These donations came on December 16, 2021, and just four days later, on December 20, Wolfson issued new charges against Cipriani for changing a bet while playing blackjack (Cipriani says he mistakenly bet $500 on a $1,000 minimum game, and that his alleged crime was simply trying to correct the mistake).
To be clear, there’s nothing unlawful on the part of Resorts World or their general counsel for making any donations to Wolfson or any other campaign for that matter. Individuals and organizations can freely donate to their politician of choice, it’s protected speech. The question is aimed squarely at Steve Wolfson and whether making donations to his campaign has an influence on his own decision-making around cases. Wolfson strongly denies that anyone gets any preferential treatment in his office. But nonetheless, critics of Wolfson have alleged that there is often special treatment for the wealthy and well-connected in Wolfson’s office.
For example, billionaire casino mogul Steve Wynn, a major Wolfson donor, has faced criminal allegations over alleged sexual misconduct. In 2018, The Wall Street Journal published allegations from a series of women who worked with Wynn that he had sexually assaulted them. Wynn admitted that he engaged in sexual intercourse with the woman, but claimed the sex was consensual and has strongly denied that he engaged in any improper sexual conduct with any of the women who accused him of misconduct. Wynn’s company paid the manicurist $7.5 million dollars to settle a civil case. And Wolfson’s office didn’t file charges of any kind in relation to any of the sexual misconduct allegations against Wynn.
Since 2013, Wynn’s companies, Wynn Resorts and Wynn Las Vegas, have together given Wolfson around $20,000. This cycle alone, Wynn has donated at least $20,000 to Wolfson through other entities including “Valmore GP LLC” and “Sierra Charter, LLC.” And while even Republicans washed their hands of Wynn’s money after the sexual assault allegations, Wolfson continues to not only take Wynn’s money, but calls him “a friend for many, many years.”
Or take the case of a billionaire who was caught with a suitcase full of drugs, including meth, heroin, and cocaine. The billionaire ultimately did not have to serve any jail time, which Vegas lawyers described as a “sweetheart deal” and gave the “appearance of impropriety.” The billionaire’s lawyer is also a Wolfson donor.
“Conflicts of interest involve putting yourself in situations in which you may have the opportunity and be tempted to do something bad, or in which the people to whom you are responsible may find it hard to know whether you acted as you did for proper or improper reasons,” Bernie Burk, Visiting Associate Professor at Penn State Law, previously told Vegas Watch. “And when it's hard to tell whether people in a position of trust acted out of honest or corrupt motivations, we can find ourselves distrusting those people and questioning the legitimacy of their decisions.”