Smiling Faces Sometimes

Monday, August 10, 2015

Someone Is Mad

I received this email this afternoon. For the record, I have only received one of the many emails Paul Bergrin sent me in the last two weeks. From what I was told, he received a couple of the five or six that I sent him.

My emails were simply some questions on the ID channel's fictional documentary and statements made by participants (attorneys). If the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) considers such questions some sort of threat, well, they lost their focus a long time ago, but then we already knew that.


from: CorrLinks <info@corrlinks.com>
to: Vicky Gallas <EMAIL REMOVED>
date: Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 3:52 PM
subject: Inmate: BERGRIN, PAUL
mailed-by: corrlinks.com
signed-by: corrlinks.com


This message informs you that you have been blocked from communicating with the above-named federal prisoner because the Bureau has determined that such communication is detrimental to the security, good order, or discipline of the facility, or might facilitate criminal activity. The prisoner with whom you were communicating is being informed of this block. You may appeal this block within 15 days of the date of this message by submitting a written request to the Warden of the prison where the prisoner is located. You should include a copy of this notice, an explanation of your appeal request, and any additional documents or information you wish to be considered.



This is my appeal:


Dear Government Lackey Scumbag and Overseer at Guantanamo North, Terre Haute, Indiana,

GFY. Consider this my appeal.

Worst Regards,

me


Obviously, some people do not want you to know the truth about this case. Emailing Paul has been a major puzzle since he went to Guantanamo North anyway and he rarely received any of my emails.

UPDATE on August 11, 2015 @6:30pm -

I was reading through the emails from the last 2 weeks that Paul clearly never received and one was a lengthy email concerning the case, various statements / certifications and the William Baskerville case, which connects to this one in relation to the Kemo murder. It may be that email that the CMU had issue with as I have never been able to receive or respond to case related emails since Paul went to this CMU. They don't want anyone helping him in any way.

There was one other 1-sentence email informing Paul that he needed to get a copy of the recent Order on the William Baskerville 2255 because the judge ordered the government to produce a list of documents and recordings. I can't even mail Paul any case related documents at this CMU and only attorneys can mail this stuff, which is completely absurd, but revealing - they don't want him to make any progress with his appeal and his own 2255. What other possible reason could there be to forbid mailing of case documents available in PACER?

So, no clue if it is this blog and posts from the last two weeks or discussion of Paul's case and certifications and documents. Either way, they want him to be incommunicado in relation to anyone except his attorneys, and I have heard they're giving him trouble on the legal calls as well.

How do you fight a case if you are not even allowed to discuss it? We can be sure that's the point.

Sunday, August 9, 2015

Misinformation and Lies: Final Post

The government's entire case is disputed on this blog and/or in documents and the trial transcripts. The Investigation Discovery production about Paul Bergrin is merely a repeat of the lies and misinformation spread by the government actors to various news contacts prior to and during the trials. I have made the decision not to waste my time disputing it all over again. If you want the truth, you will find it in the documents, transcripts and posts herein.

This post is more of a commentary on the show participants and the misinformation that each blurted during the television show. I was surprised, because I actually believed the crap I have watched in these so-called documentaries in past. ID channel spread fiction and called it nonfiction. Some of my comments are short and others not so much, but this is the final post.

 
Who in the hell is Dr. Wendy Blank? Through the first half of the show we were led to believe that she's had some sort of contact with Paul Bergrin, interviewed him, or at least encountered him at some point in time. This is completely false. Paul has never heard of, met, or encountered Dr. Wendy Blank anywhere at any point in time. Considering some of the trash that spewed from her mouth, I consider this unethical. She must be a pal of someone at the ID channel. Go hide under your rock where you belong Wendy.

Really the show should have stuck a disclaimer sign under her name that said...

DISCLAIMER: This woman has never interviewed or even encountered Paul Bergrin and everything she says is nothing more than her best guess based on the government script!

What is this "win guarantee"? Even the telephone call transcripts between Paul and Curry (William Baskerville's cousin) over the possible sentence for the drug sales states nothing like that - Paul estimates the sentence if losing at trial and if making a plea. There has never been any such thing as a "win guarantee" and anyone stating this is spreading false information. Paul was a great attorney, but he did lose sometimes and at other times, he assisted clients with plea deals just like every criminal defense attorney in the country. He was assisting William Baskerville with a plea deal when the government had him removed from the case, calling it a conflict of interest to get rid of him.

Was New York Confidential ever a nightclub? Of course not; they simply made that up. It was Jason Itzler's escort service that he operated from his loft. First time I ever heard it called a nightclub was on this show, and they illustrate the idea with tables, chairs, pole dancers and a fake club atmosphere. Weird.

Richie (Richard) Roberts pretends to be a friend of Paul's that watched him go bad. The truth is the opposite, at least in part. I'm not going to link the docs here, but I could. Look-up Richard M Roberts and see his disciplinary record with the Disciplinary Board for professionals in New Jersey. All sorts of stuff - admonished, censured, and even suspended at one point - and all for fraud and misappropriation of funds, which translates to taking clients' money and doing nothing or nothing much for it. He left defendants hanging and lied to them, often blaming his secretary or wife.

I was told that he's suspended again as of June 15, 2015, but was not able to locate the Opinion that's out there. I figure he must be appealing it and someone hid it. I have read the docs and even civil suits filed by former clients in past, and trust me - he is the worst sort of attorney a defendant in trouble could ever encounter. What a bunch of lies this man told on this show! I think it's obvious who he works for. Besides, he's almost as old as my mother. Time to retire dude, no matter how much you owe the State of New Jersey, and it's a lot from what I read. Just about everything that came out of Roberts' mouth during this show was a lie.

Paul certainly didn't meet Yolanda Jauregui through Itzler. Paul met Yolanda through his law office long before any relationship began. The contact was over her brother, Ramon Jimenez, who had legal troubles. It was several years before Yolanda latched onto Paul and became his girlfriend. The show creates a scene where Yolanda looks like a hooker in a hotel, which is also 100% false. Even Yolanda stated on the record that Paul was unaware of her cocaine deals, so when the scene turned to Yolanda and Paul with duffle bags full of cocaine, the presentation was a total lie.

The Oscar tape was not the government's "slam-dunk" in the case. This tape was tampered with, and I know that for fact as I had conversations with Oscar's ex-girlfriend some time back. She contacted me to inform me of how much of a frightening fraud Oscar the informant really was/is, and trust me - it's much worse than I have ever stated on this blog. She backed it all up by mailing an attorney assisting Paul the cellphone Oscar left behind when he disappeared after a major falling out.

If you read the trial transcripts, you'll also know that Oscar called-in a death threat against himself using a female voice in attempt to avoid testifying and the government had to bring him back to testify about that and his mental condition, including the list of drugs he was on during the time that he worked for the government. What a joke, but to present this sorry lie as a slam-dunk? Sick stuff.

And guess who transcribed this tampered recording? None other than Agent Shawn Manson-Brokos, the main agent and the agent that failed to protect her informant. A real, professional transcriptionist was unable to transcribe it.

Jack Arsenault must know about wiretaps that the government never included, because the wiretap transcripts that I have show nothing unethical or otherwise, and actually back-up Paul Bergrin's defense statements. Really Jack knows nothing much, except what the government claimed throughout this sorry prosecution.

Marc Jacobson thinks that attorneys are not supposed to represent clients that may be guilty. What planet does this quack live on? How on earth could the attorney know for sure the client is guilty? Does this oddball rule that Jacobson decided on apply to any attorneys other than Paul Bergrin?

Jason Itzler certainly was not Paul's "close friend". Why didnt the show pay Itzler a visit and ask? He has been out on parole from his 2012 (? there's so many) New York State case since February 2015, so no excuses! Paul was his attorney.

Larry McShane claims to be a journalist. Really this guy read right from the government script in this case, but he sure missed a lot. For example, in the government's application for no bond, back in the beginning (and linked in Documents section herein) there is a certification from Agent Michael Smith titled, "Bergrin Detention Certification" and also the "Cross Exam of Agent Smith" directly under it. He also missed the trial transcripts and the rest of the case.

Did this journalist bother to read either document noted above? Did he verify the so-called facts stated by the government? So where are these 5 passports and the rest of the bullcrap stated? Even Agent Smith admitted that he simply signed-off on what Agent Shawn Manson-Brokos claimed. Back in my day, journalists actually researched before putting pen to paper. What's this dude's excuse? Too many friends at the Newark US Attorney's Office perhaps.


So to summarize here, the general population has been exposed to the ID channel's fictional fraud parading as a documentary. We know they didn't think this crap up all by themselves, because clearly the producers are not that intelligent. Minor due diligence would have weeded-out the outright lies, but they neglected to even bother with that. I know I'll never view anything called a "documentary" the same way again.

I refer to this post as the final post for reason. If you want to research the truth about Paul Bergrin's malicious prosecution, the documents and trial transcripts are all linked on this blog. I have no reason to continue defending Paul or any aspect of this case and trial and it is now on you to read and research; the real information is all there for you. Unless something drastic (good or bad) happens, I won't be returning to post here.

I truly appreciate all of Paul Bergrin's supporters that I have met or encountered along the way. Sometimes I was not nice, and admittedly outright rude and lacked trust. I am sorry if I offended any one of you during this long journey. It has been almost 5 years for me as it started with one post on my other blog, deleted long ago. While I will remain in contact with Paul, I must say goodbye here. Please do not take it personally if I don't respond to comments here or emails - I'm just tired of this farce of a case.

UPDATE on August 11, 2015 @9:30pm -

A couple of other issues worthy of noting...

Richard Roberts made the statement that by representing himself in trial, he was able to testify uninterrupted through the entire trial. Nothing could be further from the truth, but don't believe me - read the trial transcripts. Judge Cavanaugh and / or his prosecutor team interrupted Paul every other minute. I have watched many trials, but never one wherein the judge participates in the questioning and stops the defense every time they're attempting to make a point.

Also important is that Paul sounds like he's really dragging and repeats himself at times. Want to know why? After trial each day he was thrown in the lockup and was often one of the last to leave the courthouse. By the time he returned to Brooklyn MDC for more lockup, search etc... he missed dinner and it was time for lights out. He rarely had time to review anything and then was awakened early in the AM for the trip back to Newark. Throughout this trial, Paul was lucky to get 2-3 hours sleep a night. We may be able to do well on 2-3 hours sleep in our 20s, but certainly not in our 50s. Paul Bergrin was starved and sleep-deprived for the trial months.


NOTE: If I am reminded of something significant that I have missed on the fictional documentary, I will update this post in the future.

Friday, August 7, 2015

Defense Attorneys that Work with the Government - Part Three

I have read about, and even encountered, many of these unethical government moles that operate under the guise of defense attorney. Some of them offer information to colleagues that work with the government in cases, but more simply take the defendant's money and do nothing much, or the bare minimum - this is much worse than robbery because often a client's life is at stake in this corrupt failure that we call the War on Drugs wherein most defendants are locked in cages for decades.

When I came across this statement in the Investigation Discovery channel's fictional documentary, it struck me hard, so much so that I replayed the recording many times later. The stinging statement that is right around the 14 minute mark:

 
He was going to really represent them; try to get them off! ---- Marc Jacobson, NY Magazine / author / close friend of Richard Roberts that published the screenplay in New York Magazine just before jury selection in the first trial, referring to Paul Bergrin, a real criminal defense attorney


You may or may not be aware, but Richard Roberts is also well-known from the American Gangster movie. He was the so-called straight cop that went to law school and became a prosecutor. I heard long ago, back when the Baddest Lawyer in New Jersey article was published, that Jacobson and Roberts needed a new movie; something about financial problems as far as Roberts is concerned. An idea was born and a screenplay was published.


Roberts collaborated with his best friend Marc Jacobson and had him write The Baddest lawyer in New Jersey immediately preceding jury selection. - Paul Bergrin


The quote from Jacobson herein stings so much that every time I read it, I'm flooded with thoughts of government moles disguised as defense attorneys stealing massive amounts of money from defendants that actually believed they would receive a real defense and real assistance from a qualified and licensed attorney.

What else does Marc Jacobson think that a criminal defense attorney is supposed to do for a client defendant if not defend and assist the defendant? I can't even imagine the answer to this question, because any potential answer makes me want to vomit. Clearly Marc Jacobson, and no one in his life, has ever needed a criminal defense attorney as I read this no other way than advocating robbery and promoting the railroading of the defendant. It's criminal.

The real problem here is that attorneys like this are everywhere - not isolated to this case, and certainly not only operating in Newark. If you knew, you would, or at least should, be horrified. I encountered a case while researching for my own trial long ago in Orlando (Orange County, Florida) in which all but a couple of attorneys operated like this and the case had 19+ defendants! The + part is because there was more than one case for some. It was messy and appalling!

Marc Jacobson has managed to convict anyone arrested for anything with such a statement. Reminds me of the idiots that scream, if you were arrested, you must be guilty - because who the hell needs courts and trials and crap like that, right? It is a kick in the teeth to anyone ever wrongfully arrested or convicted of anything in this country and every single defendant in every case. It says to me that Jacobson thinks locking-up a defendant for years or for life over some stupid drug crap is not only acceptable, but moral and ethical too.

What does Jacobson think that Paul Bergrin was supposed to do for his clients? The same that his pal Richard Roberts has done to so many over the many years he's been a practicing attorney? And yeah, I do believe I can prove that.


There's so much more. Soon dear readers, soon enough. 

Thursday, August 6, 2015

Vengeful Attorneys - Part Two

This is Part Two of my posts on the Investigation Discovery channel's fictional documentary about Paul Bergrin. The focus here is on two of the attorneys that played commentator on the show. Both despise Paul and clearly have an axe to grind.

Paul Bergrin was a star in his field and few could come close to his level of passion and competence. When he worked in the US Attorney's Office in Newark, he experienced win after win. Does that mean he was a threat to defendants? Only if you're referring to his abilities in the courtroom. The same holds true vice versa and Paul has never been a threat to the government or its informants either. He always put his best foot forward, no matter who he was representing. He was a brilliant and exceptional attorney.

So you must be wondering why several of his fellow attorneys would despise him so much that they'd trash him on television and spread such serious misinformation in favor of the government publicly. This sort of thing is unusual for criminal defense attorneys. I also wondered why the vindictiveness and decided to reach out to Paul and others that could offer answers.


Who is Jack Arsenault?

He was a go to guy in the 80's. Real deal. Didn't hear his name for 25 years until he chimed in on Paul. I thought he was dead! I know a guy who used him and spoke highly of him and he got the guy a hung jury in Newark. - Anonymous in NJ


Jack Arsenault employed key prosecutor Steven Sanders and I made comments about Jack sending Sanders to the USAO because Sanders was an asshole. Arsenault confronted me and it was confrontational. Arsenault also represented my friend Dennis Massucci whom was shot by fellow Essex County Prosecutors Detectives at the Essex ice arena and I accused Arsenault of being a piece of shit. - Paul Bergrin

What did I learn from this? I learned that Jack Arsenault is also a star, or at least was in past, albeit one with an axe to grind. Paul Bergrin couldn't say anything else negative about Jack, and Jack really should have stayed out of this fictional documentary. This is life and people have confrontations, but that's not a valid reason to trash them on television when they're at their lowest possible point in life.


Who is Henry Klingeman?

I knew the NJ housewife and her hubby were done the moment he came on board. - Anonymous


Guys like Klingeman are prosecutors for life. They never lose their prosecutorial mindset or allegiance to the office. He'll get you a deal, but winning, even if possible, would offend his twisted moral compass. - Anonymous in NJ



All I know is that his mistakes as an AUSA we're most helpful. - Anonymous in Newark


I get guys like Klingeman because the dolt that prosecuted me was the same way - when he went into private practice following my case, he lasted a year if that long. Then he got a job as an AUSA in the Eastern District of Texas. No way that guy could defend anyone! - me


Henry Klingeman represented Anthony Young, the only witness against me in the Kemo murder. He knew Young was committing perjury but due to his close friendship with fellow Assistant US Attorneys John Gay and Joe Minish, and to ingratiate himself with his former office, continued the perjury. He had a grave conflict with me because Klingeman aggressively sought to represent accused murderer Melanie May, in Middlesex County Superior Court and the family asked my opinion of Klingeman; I told them he is a shit trial attorney and not to use him and Klingeman found out about it, I admitted it to him and we became bitter enemies. Also, Klingeman represented Jose Rios, a co- defendant of Ramon Jimenez, and behind Klingeman's back, Jose gave an exculpatory affidavit. Klingeman accused me of ethics violations and brought it to Judge Desoto's attention. A hearing was held and I was excoriated on the record with Klingeman present. - Paul Bergrin

Henry Klingeman should never have taken his animosity to the Investigation Discovery channel. This is something that the producers of the show should have known, if they had bothered with even minor investigation, which doesn't say much in their favor as it is supposed to be an investigation sort of show.

Wednesday, August 5, 2015

Fictional Documentaries - Part One

I do realize that the title of this post is an oxymoron, or at least it's supposed to be. A documentary film is supposed to be nonfiction and to document facts on record. Instead, the Investigation Discovery channel show about Paul Bergrin was exactly that - a show that was for the most part, fiction.

It's clear that the producers enlisted the assistance of numerous archenemies of Paul in this production. This is complicated as I have no solid communication with Paul at this time. He sends an email and I may or may not receive it. The situation is the same vice versa. There doesn't seem to be any pattern of what is acceptable in email at this CMU (Communications Management Unit). Of course this is playing out precisely as it was plotted.

Paul is aware of the show playing on television; however, was unable to view it. I did receive an email discussing numerous actors in the show, and have attempted to confirm and expound on certain issues, though to no avail. Perhaps my emails or his responses are delayed more than usual and I will receive my responses in short time. Time will tell.

The main actors that Paul discussed were the participating attorneys with a focus on Richard Roberts. I do know that Roberts moved into Paul's office on Park Place shortly after his arrest and basically tookover any part of Paul's practice possible, including past clients looking for Paul, but I have known this for a long time. I also know that Roberts had some influence on client pleas and statements concerning Paul, though the level of influence is something that I'm unsure of. I do have much more information about Roberts, but absolutely must confirm the most relevant statements before publishing, because I am not the Investigation Discovery channel and I refuse to spread even possible misinformation. At this time, I am seeking confirmation elsewhere on a major issue with Roberts and will post on it if I receive it.

The email from Paul also discussed Marc Jacobson, Henry Klingeman, Jack Arsenault and numerous government witnesses in the first and second trials. What was stated concerning Jacobson, Klingeman and Arsenault was easily verified and it is clear with 100% certainly that these actors despised Paul Bergrin long before his arrest. The animosity displayed by each in the show is nothing new, but one would think that the Investigation Discovery show producers would have at least attempted to leave out the gossip, rumors and innuendos, as after all, this was promoted as a documentary.

For the moment, I leave you with this:
I did not have the opportunity to view the Investigation Discovery program about me, nor did I have any input. I know it was replete with fabrications, contrived myths and that the commentators were motivated by their greed and desires to hurt and punish me.
 
I want the record to be straight. You could attack me, but stay away from my family. I was hospitalized, I did suffer very severe and substantial injuries on multiple occasions, but there was never a scintilla of proof my father caused anything. My father served in the Air Force during the Korean conflict and was honorably discharged. He became a New York police officer and served honorably for 26 years. He rose to the rank of Lt and was going to be promoted to Capt when he died of cancer. He spent all 26 years of his career on the streets and in the highest crime rate areas; with the most violence. He went 19 years without ever using a sick day and when he died was given an Inspector's funeral. Over 100 law enforcement officers attended. He never had a disciplinary charge and the allegations of abuse were unfounded.


This is just Part One of many posts that will discuss this misrepresentation of reality and in some situations, provable outright lies, asserted by the many participants, including the narrator. I also await Paul's response concerning this Dr. Wendy Blank that commented throughout the show as I have my doubts that she has ever even met Paul Bergrin. Investigation discovery my ass!