For being convicted Feb. 9 of multiple insurance fraud felonies, John Smiley and Cynthia Biasi-Smiley were sentenced to 240 days in county jail, 5 years formal probation, and ordered to pay $38,206.70 in recompense to the State Compensation Insurance Fund.
The two were charged due to their fraudulent workers’ compensation that John sustained a supposedly “on duty” injury. Previously, the couple was convicted of attempted perjury in an earlier court proceeding.
According to an official statement reiterated by WorkersCompensation.com, the Smileys went to a swinger's club in San Francisco on April 27, 2008. There, the two met with another couple and traded partners for the night. An argument soon followed, when the female John was with accused him of not wearing a condom. The female’s companion then threatened John, saying he “kills people for a living” and that “was going to kill him.” At that point, the Smileys left the club. As the two walked to their car, however, John was shot in the back by the male. The injury left John a paraplegic.
Shortly after the shooting, the Smileys told the San Francisco Police Department that they did not recognize or know the male and female, and had never seen either of them before that night. No one was arrested in connection to the shooting.
Roughly 11 months later, John—an ex-correctional officer with California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation—filed a claim for workers’ compensation benefits, as well as an Industrial Disability Retirement with CalPERS. Cynthia also filed a lien for workers’ compensation benefits based on her care of her injured husband.
In their claims, the two testified under oath that they could not remember the club they were leaving when the shooting occurred, and that they could not think of any reason why the man shot John. Both also testified that neither of them ever touched, spoke to, ran into, or danced with the unknown couple in the incident. John additionally testified that he never once “looked” at the woman even though he told authorities previously that he had sexual intercourse with her.
John claimed he recognized the shooter as a parolee he had once transported; this was to make the injury seem “work related” and allow him to collect compensation. When questioned by officers just after the shooting, however, John said that the shooting had nothing to do with his work, and neither of the two recognized the shooter and his wife.
