Smiling Faces Sometimes

Monday, July 27, 2015

Exposing Tyrants

That fat pig Chris Christie was the catalyst behind my case. No one realizes that he was not qualified to be NJ US Attorney. He had no experience and his credentials were deminimis. There were so many qualified individuals but he was chosen because he could be bought by Bush and Ashcroft and was dirty. In exchange for him receiving the position, he agreed to destroy me, eviscerate my credibility about Abu Ghraib, Objective Iron Triangle and the Parker case and the truth I told about the White Houses involvement, knowledge and being the proponent of torture and violating international law; while scapegoating young soldiers incapable of defending themselves against
these tyrants. I exposed all that.

Christie rewarded Ashcroft a 40 million dollar no bid no compete contract for New Jersey legal work. This is a Missouri ex Governor and Missouri Lawyer. All the great lawyers in New Jersey and NY and just coincidentally, the man who got Christie the US Attorney position gets a 40 million dollar contract.

I cannot believe this is not being publicized.

I heard ABC has put my Abu Ghraib videos on YOU TUBE, especially when I prevented Bush from destroying it and made it a crime scene.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

When you use the bop inmate locator and enter Paul's name, nothing comes up.

Vicky Gallas said...

I was so excited that I turned on the laptop to check. Sure it does - he's in the same damn shithole (CMU in Terre Haute). You must have spelled it wrong - inmate locator requires the exact spelling.

I was all excited. Been waiting for Paul to be transferred, but definitely losing faith, though I doubted it would happen to begin with because this is one fixed case and the fixin' goes to the top of the heap.

Anyway, try again - it's there.

Anonymous said...

It's hard to misspell his name. We share a Christian name, but I'll try again. Thanks

Bonnie Akridge said...

Hi Vicky. What a fascinating story. I live in South Jersey and have never even heard of all this until last night when Pauls case was on the ID channel so I came in and Googled his name and I can't believe all the stuff. Will post after more exploring of the mountains of articles and news stories and of course the blogs so that I may have a well rounded view of the case.

Vicky Gallas said...

@Bonnie -

I apologize for the delay, but wanted to wait until I was on the laptop to offer a proper response. Thank you for your interest in researching to truly understand what happened here - I have hopes that more people will do the same.

I have so much to say about the fictional story told on the ID channel last night - so much that I will be addressing it in a series of 3-5 posts in the coming week. My first thought is that I feel deceived as I believed this series (Untouchable Power Corrupts) and the rest of their shows to be documentary / non-fiction, but this was entirely fiction. You'll see. I took 3 pages of notes while watching and intend to roll through the recording over the weekend.

The first issue that jumped out at me was the repeated and continuous reference to Jason Itzler's NY Confidential (his escort service) as being a "nightclub". I'll have to count how many times they called it a club or nightclub, especially with the image of Paul at a table with a couple of women sipping champagne. They actually made it look like a club. Shocking because I have read every document and transcripts from both trials and no one has ever referred to Itzler's service as a nightclub. Itzler never referred to his escort business as a nightclub in any of the many news appearances back then. It was a loft and he used it as an office to run his service. No witness ever referred to it as a nightclub. No clue what that's all about, but it's total crap, just like the rest of the show.

If I had to briefly summarize a thought on the show... Each party that spoke negatively about Paul Bergrin throughout the show also pretended to know his deepest secrets and acted like they used to be pals. This is far from the truth. If Paul ever even spoke to any one of them it was way back when he worked in the US Attorney's Office or perhaps a brief, cordial hello in court. Everything these men had to say was right out of the government's mouth - so many lies that have been proven as exactly that - lies. Several of them have something to gain, but that will be addressed in a post.

One person close to the case stated to me that this was the first he's heard of Jack Arsenault in 25 years - he thought Arsenault was dead. Anyway, much more for later...

I have a website up with the trial transcripts in PDF - please read if you have the time. It's like reading 50 books though, so definitely time consuming. Also, please read Maximum Hypocrisy on the site's main page:

http://paulbergrin.info/

Stay tuned... will start posting on all of this by Monday.

Anonymous said...

Very anxious to read your comments soon Vicky. That TV show on Paul Bergrin was
pure bullshit. Paul has become whatever they want him to be, what is next
to justify their injustice, what are they going to invent. These people should
go to Hollywood and create fiction movies, they would be more popular and of course
make more money.



Anonymous said...

Vicky,

For your information the 3 attorneys that narrated the episode are reputable state renown criminal defense attorneys. Jack Arsenault, Richie Roberts, and Henry K are all great trial lawyers who have a lot of experience (state/federal) and do a ton of work in Newark. While they might not have been "buddies" with Paul I am sure they heard and know a lot of facts and knowledge that the average lay person wouldn't know. Good criminal defense lawyers know more than u think about each other especially since all 4 of them did a ton of work in Newark. None of those attorneys have anything to gain from being honest and out spoken about their stories regarding paul. Jack, Richie, and Henry didn't make any money from that episode and in regards to their reputation have nothing to gain. They are all very highly regarding in the legal community and definitely have nothing to gain. All 3 of those attorneys knew paul for around 30 years and know a lot more than you think. Imagine going to high school with the same group of people for 30 years in Newark. You would know everything about them too.

Vicky Gallas said...

@the last Anonymous

I must note that you do not mention Chris Christie (post topic) in the list of reputable attorneys. Interesting. I already know more than you might imagine about Richie Roberts and I am well aware that participants in so-called documentaries are not paid. Not being paid to participate in this sham has nothing at all to do with having something to gain, but we can dive deeper into that area in an upcoming post.

From a client or defendant perspective, when I choose an attorney, I'm not looking at how wonderful they get along with anyone in the US Attorney's Office, and if anything, much the opposite. The intelligent defendant doesn't want the prosecuting attorney's golf buddy to represent him, unless he's seeking the best deal of course. I'm much more interested in trial wins. As a matter of fact, I'd be more into a list of criminal defense trial wins for Richie, Jack and Henry if you've got one...

Ah, so what you're saying is that each simply acted like Paul's best buddy that knew all he did over the years in this so-called documentary and repeated crap from the agents and USAO participants? Well, that's what I said - that not one of them had firsthand knowledge of much of anything stated. So we're on the same plane on this major problem. Saying that they heard stuff just doesn't cut it when presenting information that's supposed to be factual. In the legal world, I believe that's often referred to as hearsay.

Thanks for playing.

Anonymous said...

WELL DONE VICKY. We all know that these attorneys that have blab against Paul Bergrin are ignorant of their stupidity and have sold their soul more than once
to the devil.

Vicky Gallas said...

@the last Anonymous

Well, if your reference to "sold their soul to the devil" is referring to the Newark USAO, then I'll agree with you. However, if the reference is to representimg and truly defending a client is "sold their soul..." I will adamantly disagree. Each and every defendant is entitled to a quality defense by their attorney, no matter what the government claims they did. The government representatives lie, often and quite well.

I have been rolling through the video and found numerous excellent quotes to discuss in the first post. I'm curious how the speakers could possibly defend their statements. I have had my fill of bs fiction for the day though, and I suppose that's the reason I've planned the first post for late Monday. I do have my limits on listening to hearsay garbage from gabby attorneys.

Anonymous said...

Paul Bergrin did not go to high school with Jack Arsenault or Richie Roberts or
Henry K., he went to high school at Far Rockaway High School in Queens NY and
graduated in 1973. He attended Brooklyn College NOT NEWARK. He then went to
law school at Nova Southeastern University in Florida NOT NEWARK. Only in 1987 did
Mr Bergrin join the USA Attorneys office in Newark that is not 30 years ago, he
was arrested in 2009. This TV show is a bundle of stupid lies to impress the population and hurt him. The producers who made this show should never have done this.

Vicky Gallas said...

I didn't think Paul went to high school with any of those clowns and emailed him this morning to ask that and several other questions, mostly pertaining to these buddy boys that claimed to be his pal for so long and know him so well. They outright lied in some situations and put on an acting performance in others! To insinuate that Paul met Yolanda through Itzler's service was another major lie. Just so much. I think this fiction video was produced by the government. It sure is not a documentary!

Vicky Gallas said...

Oh and @the anonymous that's a frequent defender of the government's absurd prosecution on this blog and referred to those clowns in the show as "reputable attorneys" herein:

You claim they're top notch trial attorneys. I said I want a list of each one's criminal defense trial wins. Shouldn't be too complicated as I seriously doubt it's long, if it exists, so go ahead and post that. Or are you claiming that plea deal government minions are reputable trial attorneys?

Until I see a list or get an apology for the lack of one, I won't be posting your verbal attacks on Paul Bergrin or myself. Do either and you have my word that I'll publish your last post and debate you.

The ball is in your court. ;-)

Vicky Gallas said...

To add to my last comment -

When you send over that list (lol) make it federal cases only, because I'm gonna look 'em up. And I'll go ahead and assume you are aware that I'm not interested in any 30 year-old cases. And must be criminal defense. Okay, I think that covers it.