I'm referencing a movie, The taking of Pelham 123. In it, as a part of the protagonists back story, he is accused of taking a bribe from a Japanese manufacturer to win a contract to supplying trains to the New York metropolitan transport authority. He seems like a good and moral man which begs the question, why would he take a bribe. It is eventually revealed that he took the money for a respectable reason and that he only accepted the so called bribe because he was going to recommend that specific manufacturer anyway.
What I'm asking is, assuming he had a way of sufficiently proving he had already made that decision and that it wasn't swayed by the money, would he be guilty of taking a bribe? If not, what, if anything, would he be guilty of?
Edit: as mentioned in a comment below, what if he took the bribe money, law enforcement had evidenceof this transaction, then he ends up choosing a different manufacturerthus not honoring the bribe. Would he still be charged, if so what would he be guilty of?