Score:   1
Docket Number:   ND-IN  2:20-cr-00118
Case Name:   United States of America v. Stahura
  Press Releases:
HAMMOND – Joseph Stahura, age 64, of Whiting, Indiana, was charged with wire fraud and filing a false income tax return, announced U.S. Attorney Thomas L. Kirsch II.  He has entered into a plea agreement indicating his intent to plead guilty to both charges.  His wife, Diane Stahura, age 64, also of Whiting, Indiana entered into a deferred prosecution agreement wherein she acknowledges that the Government has sufficient evidence to charge her with wire fraud.

United States Attorney Thomas L. Kirsch II said,

“Today’s charges and guilty plea are another black eye for Northwest Indiana.  Mr. Stahura, an elected official for over 35 years, illegally used his campaign funds for personal activities and expenditures and lied about it on his publically filed campaign reports and tax returns.  He knew his conduct was illegal, yet he persisted in it for over 5 years.

“My office has a long history of aggressively pursuing public corruption cases on behalf of the honest citizens of our community. That will continue as long as I am US Attorney.  While most elected officials serve the public professionally and honestly, some do not.  Those who seek illegal personal gain by virtue of their public office will be held accountable.

“If you have information concerning corrupt public officials, I encourage you to call my office or the FBI.”

According to documents in the case, Mr. Stahura, the Mayor of Whiting, Indiana since 2004, and his wife used his campaign fund for personal expenditures, like gambling, credit card debt and providing financial support to an adult daughter.  Mr. Stahura has been the Mayor of Whiting since 2004 and prior to that he served as a Whiting City Councilman for 20 years.  He was also the Chairman and Treasurer of his campaign committee entitled “Committee to Elect Joe Stahura” (“Committee”). 

From February 2014 through 2019, Mr. and Mrs. Stahura used approximately $255,000 of funds from the “Committee” for personal purposes, while disguising the activity by filing campaign reports with false and misleading information and by omitting material information from the reports.  To further defraud, they sought donations from individuals and entities, and held fund raising events to raise money for the “Committee”.  Mrs. Stahura transferred money from the “Committee’s” bank account to the Stahuras’ personal bank account, which were then used the funds to pay personal bills, provide support for their daughter and gamble at casinos.  To further the scheme, on multiple occasions between 2014 and 2019, Joe Stahura filed false and misleading campaign finance reports with the Board of Elections which omitted information about the personal use of the campaign funds that had been occurring from 2014 through November 2019. 

In April 2019, Mr. Stahura filed a false tax return.  He falsely listed his gross income, not accounting for the amount stolen from the Campaign Account in 2018 which was approximately $51,480.  Additionally, on his campaign finance report he overstated the “loan repayment amount” to his campaign by approximately $40,000.

Indiana campaign finance law restricted the use of money contributed to a campaign committee. Candidates could use committee money to pay expenses reasonably related to a campaign for political office, continuing political activity, and activity related to service in elected office.  Candidates could not use committee money for a primarily personal purpose or commingle personal funds with campaign funds.  Indiana campaign finance law also required campaign committees to regularly file public reports using a state form containing instructions including “WARNING: Using campaign funds for primarily personal purposes is prohibited.” Reports had to itemize each expenditure above $100, name the recipient and state a purpose.  These reports provided citizens with a record of the expenditure of campaign funds, provided donors with a measure of accountability regarding the funds, and assisted voters in making informed decisions at the polls.

Mr. Stahura entered into a plea agreement, which has been filed with the court, to resolve the criminal charges.  If this signed plea agreement is accepted by the court, the length of sentence and amount of restitution will be determined by the court at a sentencing hearing after consideration of federal sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

“Public corruption continues to be a high priority for IRS Criminal Investigation”, stated Special Agent in Charge Kathy A. Enstrom of the IRS Criminal Investigation, Chicago Field Office. “Public officials stealing campaign funds for personal purposes is an unacceptable practice and IRS Criminal Investigation will be there to uncover the fraud and tax evasion in order to bring the dishonest officials to justice.”   

“Public corruption is the top criminal investigative priority for the FBI. The American people and the FBI do not tolerate public officials who use their position for private gain. Public corruption erodes the trust constituents put in their elected officials and undermines the integrity of government,” said Special Agent in Charge Paul Keenan, FBI Indianapolis. “The FBI and our partner law enforcement agencies will continue our mission to root out fraud and corruption in all forms and serve our communities."

This case is being investigated by the Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigation Division and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, both members of the US Attorney’s Public Corruption Task Force.  The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Philip Benson and Gary Bell. 

# # #                                   

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hp2BfTjwq-IRzC12d_3NcaISAtqD73zh1rMlGEyd-R8
  Last Updated: 2026-03-09 03:08:23 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E