Navy Admiral GUILTY – Faces 30 YEARS for Bribe

A retired four-star Navy Admiral who once commanded forces across Europe faces up to 30 years in prison after being convicted in a bribery scheme that has sent shockwaves through military leadership circles.

At a Glance

  • Admiral Robert P. Burke was convicted of bribery and conspiracy for steering a $355,000
  • Navy contract to a company that offered him a $500,000 annual salary and stock options
  • Burke, who retired in 2022, is one of the highest-ranking U.S. military officers ever convicted of a federal crime
  • U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro led the prosecution, which resulted in guilty verdicts on four felony counts
  • Burke faces a potential 30-year prison sentence with final sentencing scheduled for August
  • His defense attorney plans to appeal the verdict, claiming incomplete evidence was presented to the jury

Highest-Ranking Officer Convicted in Corruption Case

Admiral Robert P. Burke, who once served as the Navy’s second-highest-ranking officer, was found guilty on four felony counts including bribery and conspiracy to commit bribery. The verdict makes Burke the highest-ranking U.S. military officer ever convicted of a federal crime. Until his retirement in 2022, Burke commanded naval forces in Europe, Russia, and most of Africa during the period when the bribery scheme took place. The prosecution, led by interim U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, presented evidence that Burke leveraged his position to direct a government contract to a company that had promised him lucrative compensation.

The $500,000 Salary Bribery Scheme

Court documents revealed that Burke accepted an offer of a $500,000 yearly salary and 100,000 stock options in exchange for steering a Navy contract to the company involved in the scheme, identified in court records only as “Company A.” The arrangement was reportedly finalized during a meeting in July 2021, while Burke was still on active duty. Before his retirement, Burke ordered a $355,000 contract be awarded to Company A, fulfilling his end of the corrupt bargain. Two co-conspirators, Yongchul “Charlie” Kim and Meghan Messenger, were also implicated in the scheme and are facing their own bribery charges in upcoming trials.

Extensive Felony Charges and Potential Sentencing

The jury convicted Burke on multiple serious charges: conspiracy to commit bribery, bribery, performing acts affecting a personal financial interest, and concealing material facts related to his financial entanglements. Each charge carries significant penalties, with Burke now facing up to 30 years in federal prison. Sentencing has been scheduled for August, giving Burke’s legal team time to prepare their arguments for leniency. The case represents a rare instance of such high-level military corruption being successfully prosecuted in federal court, sending a strong message throughout the armed forces leadership.

Defense Plans to Appeal Verdict

Timothy Parlatore, Burke’s defense attorney, has already announced plans to appeal the verdict. He expressed disappointment with the outcome and claimed the jury did not receive complete evidence that would have provided important context. “We’re disappointed with the verdict, but we are planning to appeal – and I think that there’s a viable appeal here,” Parlatore stated. The defense attorney further criticized the judge’s evidentiary rulings, saying, “The judge didn’t let the jury hear the whole thing, so they didn’t really get the context.” Parlatore also expressed strong criticism of the investigative agencies involved in the case.

Significance for Military Integrity

The conviction of an officer at Burke’s level represents a significant moment for military accountability and oversight. As the Navy’s former Vice Chief of Naval Operations before his European command assignment, Burke held immense power and responsibility. His conviction stands as a stark reminder that even the highest ranks are not above the law. The prosecution’s success in this case demonstrates the Justice Department’s commitment to pursuing corruption at all levels of government service, regardless of the defendant’s former status or connections. The case may also prompt further scrutiny of military procurement processes and ethics training.