South Jersey Party leader George Norcross is fighting the racketeering case in court and in the press

A powerful South Jersey political boss accused of illegally profiting from development in Camden is arguing in court that the charges against him are a “crime without a crime,” as his allies challenge the attorney general’s office in the court of public opinion attack.

George Norcross, who runs New Jersey’s most effective political machine and has enormous influence across the state, was indicted in June along with five others on charges of running a criminal enterprise in Camden. Prosecutors allege he used his political power to extort property and defraud the government. Last week, members of the defense team attacked the case in a legal report and the attorney general’s office in an editorial, following a pattern seen in previous Norcross controversies.

On Tuesday, Norcross’s attorney, Michael Critchley, filed a motion to dismiss the charges, arguing that the alleged threats and extortion were not criminal but merely hard bargaining.

“The indictment appears to take offense at the fact that some private citizens have close ties to public officials, but that is a feature of democratic self-government – not a bug. And certainly not a crime,” Critchley wrote.

“It is never alleged that any defendant threatened anyone with violence or blackmail; There is also no allegation of corruption by officials. Rather, the indictment is based on the assumption that the defendants exerted economic pressure and political influence.”

Meanwhile, a member of the defense team is also running a public relations campaign attacking Attorney General Matthew Platkin and his public corruption prosecution unit.

Lee Vartan, a defense attorney working on the Norcross case, published an opinion piece in the Star-Ledger and nj.com on Wednesday supporting a bill introduced in the state legislature that would create an agency to “monitor prosecutorial abuses.”

“When prosecutors go ‘ruthless,’ there are few checks and even fewer consequences,” Vartan wrote.

One important detail was conspicuously missing from the article: Vartan represents William Tambussi, a personal attorney for Norcross who is also charged in the case. Vartan has also been quoted in two other Star-Ledger columns criticizing the attorney general’s corruption division. He was also not found to have been involved in the Norcross case in these cases.

“We did not know that Vartan represented one of the accused parties alongside Norcross, an honest mistake. It should have been noted,” said Tom Moran, editorial page editor and columnist for the Star-Ledger. But he defended three recent opinion pieces criticizing the Office of Public Integrity and Accountability. “This office has seriously botched several major cases and deserves criticism,” Moran said.

Vartan did not comment.

The attorney general’s office says criticism often comes with high-profile cases. In a statement, Platkin defended the Office of Public Integrity and Accountability, which investigates political corruption, fatal encounters with police and internal law enforcement affairs.

“Their work is not only delicate, but also time-consuming and complicated — and often unpopular with powerful people and interest groups,” Platkin said. “Their effective work promotes trust in government and agencies whose mission is to serve the public by holding power to account.”

Data provided by the Attorney General’s Office shows the corruption unit has achieved convictions or other successful resolutions in half of its cases.

In New Jersey, the attorney general is appointed by the governor. Platkin’s term ends in January 2026 when Murphy leaves office.

Norcross himself said the charges against him were an example of a prosecutorial run amok. He claims Platkin has held a grudge for years.

“Matt Platkin has been deciding since the day he got there … how they were going to deter the South Jersey Democratic Party, its elected officials and others he was feuding with,” Norcross told reporters.

The Norcross machine has previously adopted the tactic of combining negative press coverage of opponents with legal maneuvers. In 2019, Norcross sued Murphy to stop the governor’s investigation into the tax relief program, which is now part of the criminal complaint against Norcross. In this case, numerous articles published by the NJ Globe were cited in court documents filed by Norcross’s attorneys to support their arguments.

Norcross launched a similar public relations campaign in the early 2000s when he was under investigation for forcing city leaders in Palmyra to sign a contract with the engineering firm of his choice. He was captured on tape insisting that the city attorney be fired.

Norcross fought that case in the press until it stalled under a new attorney general who thwarted cases involving Democrats.

Not everyone sees the criticism of Platkin as a problem.

Former Attorney General John Farmer, who served from 1999 to 2002 and was also dean of the Rutgers School of Law, says he does not believe the bad press will undermine Platkin’s ability to prosecute the case.

“I know some of his decisions were not the most popular. But that tells me he’s trying to do the job the way it’s supposed to be done,” Farmer said.