Smiling Faces Sometimes

Friday, September 14, 2012

Keeping this Case in the Sunshine

It is my intention to keep all proceedings against Paul Bergrin in the sunshine. In other words, as a result of misinformation often stated in various newspapers and in the New York Magazine article from June of 2011, all documents and information in Paul Bergrin proceedings that can be published for public viewing will be. We want you to know what has been done to Bergrin.

At this point it is not clear why DOJ prosecutors requested and were granted that documents relevant to government misconduct in this case be sealed. I can only assure you that these documents were not filed in camera or under seal by the defense. The document in question here is the certification filed by the defense of the private investigator's findings that lists many witnesses and includes their statements of government coercion and subornation of perjury in this case.

The defense certainly has no desire to hide these documents so damaging to the government from public view. The party that chooses to hide this information is, of course, the government. There is no valid reason for this certifcation to be hidden from public view. In the document, the defense identified witnesses by number and without gender so the government couldn't identify them and try to intimidate them for giving statements.

The main reason that I started this blog is to help prevent the government from being able to silently railroad Paul Bergrin, as much as is possible. I have just added more documents to the Documents page of this blog, including the Second Superseding Indictment that will apply in the upcoming trial as a result of the counts not being severed this time. I also included juror notes from the first trial and numerous other documents.

As soon as it's practicable, I will be uploading more documents, including the certification that is now sealed. Know that the defense and its supporters want to keep these proceedings and all documents filed available for the public to view without exception. The entire point of this blog is to present facts and truth and keep this case in the sunshine. Hopefully this certification will be unsealed soon.

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Motions Denied

I received an email a couple of hours ago:

Sadly, all Paul's motion were denied.  The case is not severed, all 4o4b evidence comes in, and the motion to have a pretrial hearing on government misconduct was denied. There was no oral argument. That the judge would write up his reason for denying the pretrial hearing. The judge adopted all of Judge Martini's former rulings.
I will post the documents as they are available to me. Now I can state my thoughts.

I understand that many attorneys will disagree with me and I know that Bergrin will; however, I do understand why U.S. District Judge Dennis Cavanaugh ruled as he did in each situation. I consider the denial to sever the case a good thing. Though I understand all too well how government misconduct works, when the victim witnesses to said misconduct fear having their names on sworn affidavits, not much can be done as it is too complicated to decide if it is indeed fear of retribution by the government or simple agreement with a private investigator just because he is there at the moment. Paul Bergrin is not guilty of any counts, so with or without the 404(b) evidence, he can prevail.

I do understand the reasons for wanting the counts severed and separate trials. However, if I were the defendant, there's no way I could manage multiple trials. It would be far too stressful and take too long. Throw it all together and I will sort it out piece by piece, sentence by sentence, word by word until it ends. Bergrin has already dealt with one trial that resulted in a hung jury and mistrial. How many more could he deal with? Make no mistake: This will be a long trial.

Most informants are like putty in the hands of government agents and prosecutors. They become puppets that state exactly what they're told to state. They each have something to gain, no doubt. The argument could be made that the victims / witnesses to the misconduct said anything to get the private investigator out of there. Not that I believe this in any way, shape, or form, but I do believe that such a thesis is the basis for an argument if the motion for a pretrial hearing had been granted.

In my opinion, it is better that no pretrial hearing in reference to the government misconduct was granted. I can only compare it to a situation with my co-defendant at my own trial. If only he had shut the hell up and not told prosecutors that he intended to tell the truth on the stand. The intelligent route would have been to wait until he was on the stand and simply tell the truth. I'd place a bet that they couldn't have sentenced him to 36 months in prison if he had told the court and jury exactly what agents and prosecutors did to him and the truth about our relationship. Instead he alerted prosecutors as to what he intended to say on the stand and they literally threw him out of the courthouse. The state did not call him to testify. Do you blame them?

In my opinion, the 404(b) evidence can't harm Bergrin. So much has been twisted in this case by a government with an agenda. Each statement by the criminal informant witnesses should be analyzed and gutted. When you get down to the basics, there is no evidence of the criminal acts that he has been indicted on.

When all is said and done, much of the case is over when the jury is chosen. A juror like me, my son, or even any of my friends and acquaintances that were aware of one or more acts of misconduct or even a single lie on the part of prosecutors or agents would not convict on any count. Let's face it... there are lots of people in Newark that have had such experiences or had relatives that have suffered at the hands of a bad cop or a lying prosecutor and I seriously doubt that the government will be able to eliminate each and every one in voire dire.

Look for the documents referenced herein soon.