Hernan Lopez Breaks Silence as Federal Bribery Case Ends

Hernan Lopez got a phone call at home in April 2020 that upended his world.

On that day, the founder of the Wondery podcast network and former head of Fox International Channels learned that he was about to be indicted by federal prosecutors in New York. He had been caught up in a long-running white collar corruption probe related to TV rights deals involving FIFA and other leagues and sports. He was accused of taking part in a bribery scheme to secure various sports rights for Fox outlets in the U.S. and abroad. Lopez has steadfastly maintained he did nothing wrong and was not aware of a bribery scheme that involved one of Fox’s joint venture partners.

But a federal jury disagreed. After a seven-week trial, Lopez was convicted in March 2023, along with the sports marketing firm Full Play Group, of participating in a scheme to bribe South American soccer officials. But in September of that year, U.S. District Judge Pamela Chen granted Lopez’s motion for acquittal and also overturned the conviction of Full Play.

In July of this year, a federal appeals panel overturned Chen’s decision and reinstated the convictions. Lopez was about to take his appeal to the Supreme Court when prosecutors in New York’s Eastern District did an about-face, writing to Chen to ask her to dismiss the charges against Lopez and Full Play Group “in the interests of justice.” The Supreme Court is set to formalize the dismissal early next year.

For Lopez, the letter sent on Dec. 9 by prosecutor Joseph Nocella Jr., U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, marks the end of a six-year odyssey through the federal criminal justice system. The complicated legal battle erupted as Lopez was building the popular Wondery podcast network, which he launched after leaving Fox in 2016.

Lopez has asserted that his prosecution was driven by false allegations made against him by a defendant who cooperated with prosecutors, Alejandro Burzaco. Burzaco, a former sports marketing executive, pleaded guilty and testified during the trial to have been involved in bribery schemes.

A spokesman for the Eastern District declined to comment on the decision to seek a dismissal of the case. Jim Walden, a lawyer for Burzaco, denies Lopez’s assertion about Burzaco, who pleaded guilty to a corruption charge. “Alejandro was a truthful and compelling witness, who risked much to fully accept responsibility and bring others to justice. This is why prosecutors dubbed him the ‘Super Man’ of restorative justice,” Walden said in a statement.

Here, as Lopez awaits the final step of the dismissal, he discusses his experience in depth for the first time. He reflects on the toll that the prosecution took on his husband and two children, and how he has been changed by his journey through the federal courts.

It’s been a long process for you. Now that the Justice Department is taking the last step toward dismissing this case, how do you feel?

I feel finally at peace that a prosecution that never should have been brought is about to be dismissed. At the same time, I know I won’t get back the six years of my life, and I would like to raise awareness in the business community that a wrongful prosecution can have incredibly strong effects on the lives of people and on businesses in the U.S.

In terms of your ability to see this through, to go through six years of hearings, a nearly two-month trial and to have a legal team on board the whole time. What kind of emotional stamina and financial resources did you need?

First knowing that the truth was by my side. I did not approve or have any knowledge of any bribes paid by anyone. I was never accused of bribing people or directing any bribes, and I knew that when time went by, the truth eventually will come out and we will get to the right outcome. But it was really that connection with perspective and my own center of gravity, and knowing that the people who know me would never believe this about me. Those are the things that really kept me centered throughout these six difficult years.

You were not accused of paying a bribe personally. You were basically accused of being the boss, and therefore you, you should have known.

I was not accused of taking a bribe, and I was also not accused of paying or directing any bribes. What the prosecutors instead alleged was that I acquiesced into a scheme organized by a former joint venture partner who himself was the one paying bribes and siphoning money away for his own benefit, and he was doing it behind my back and the backs of everybody at Fox.

Did you go into it thinking, I will be dropped at some point?

I thought this will be solved in just a matter of days. When the indictment first came in, I was shocked and I was confused. Because I did not fully appreciate how our federal criminal system works, I felt that when [prosecutors] talk to my lawyers, they will understand that this has no basis in truth, and therefore they will drop the case. Little did I know that it would take them six years to finally realize how their case was based not only on false facts, but also on faulty law.

You never engaged in any kind of settlement discussions?

It was never even a consideration. I knew I was going to fight it. And it was fortunate that my former employer had the obligation to cover the legal bills. That gave me a luxury that many people in my situation don’t often have.

When was the first time that you were informed that you were facing legal jeopardy as part of the larger federal probe? Was it in an email? Was it a phone call?

It was the day that my lawyer called me on the first Sunday in April of 2020, and told me, unfortunately, ‘I have bad news. There’s an indictment against you. It will become public tomorrow.’ Before that, I knew that my lawyers and Fox’s lawyers had been talking to the government. I had never been told that I was being targeted. It was not even a consideration in my mind.

Were you at home?

I was. I was home. Remember, this was when we had been ordered to go home for the pandemic. And this being a Sunday, we had just finished watching a movie, and my world dropped. I did not fully appreciate what it means to be the target of a federal indictment until it happened to me.

What was the first step you took? You were running Wondery at that time.

So I had to tell people in order. So that Sunday night, obviously my husband was with me. He was equally shocked, probably more shocked even than I was. I told my board members at Wondery — all of them were in complete shock. The next morning, I told my executive team in a meeting — again, the same reaction. And I only had a few more hours before I could tell my parents, so that they wouldn’t hear it from the press before they heard it from me. I told everybody to stay calm, because I believed that this was a mistake that was going to be corrected. I did not appreciate it would take so long for it to be corrected.

That must have been incredibly emotional.

It was tough. It was in some respects easier because people who knew me knew that this was so out of character for me that they did not believe it for a second.

So you went through a jury trial and you were convicted in 2023, which was destined to be overturned, then reinstated and now on track for dismissal. Was the conviction by a jury your lowest point?

That was the low point to hear that word from the foreman and know that after four days of deliberation, which is an unusually long amount of time, that they had reached the wrong conclusion was devastating. One thing that gave me comfort was that the judge [Chen] went and talked to the jury and stayed with them for what my lawyers tell me was an unusually long amount of time. And she came back and she did not agree with the government’s motion to remand me. Instead, I was able to go back home. As the jurors said at the time, they found me guilty because as the CEO, I should have known. That is not the basis to convict somebody of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. And at the time my lawyers saw it, I saw it and and I knew that that was not the end.

Were you ever held in federal custody?

Because it was in the pandemic, they did not. They did arraignments by video conference. Fortunately, I was never in custody.

So as all this is happening, you’re going on five years into Wondery, and in fact you will sell the company by the end of the year to Amazon. Was that influenced by your legal predicament?

I decided to sell Wondery in 2020 given a number of considerations, most importantly, the changing landscape of the potential companies that could buy it. I cannot tell you that the indictment didn’t have anything at all to do with my decision. Yes, it did weigh on my decision, but it wasn’t the primary factor.

Do you have any regrets about that?

I don’t have regrets in general. If there’s one regret I have is that I should have taken this investigation more proactively when I heard that this cooperator was talking to the government, instead of assuming, of course, the prosecutors will understand. I should have at that moment been more proactive, and instructed my lawyers to be proactive to prevent an indictment from happening.

How did this affect your family? You have two teenage children.

I kept it from them. They were 10 and nine when this happened, and I did not tell them at all until I was ready to go to trial. Because I wanted them to understand why my husband and I were going to be gone for so long. We came back and forth over the weekends, but I wanted them to take it as a lesson that accused doesn’t mean guilty. The presumption of innocence means we do not prejudge. And when we know the truth, the truth ultimately comes out.

How has this ordeal changed you?

In one positive way, which is that I used to assume too quickly that accusations were made because where there’s smoke there’s fire. It might be a function of how I grew up. I grew up under a military dictatorship in Argentina and even though jurors are told to presume innocence, most people unfortunately assume that the person who’s indicted must have done something to be there, and that’s one of the reasons why federal prosecutors get 90-plus percent conviction rates. And this changed me very much in the way that I don’t assume quickly, I don’t prejudge. I think that is, in many respects, the biggest positive that has come out of this experience.

What are you looking to do now that the legal jeopardy is over? You launched a research firm, Owl & Co., in early 2024.

Yes, I started a research and consulting company. This is what I’m doing now.