Abdul Williams has already been given
the benefit of NOT BEING CHARGED WITH ANY HEROIN DISTRIBUTION, only
up to 5 kg of cocaine, and none of his murders and shootings. More
importantly, while at the Hudson County Jail he set up a 7 kg cocaine
transaction that he conducted with his father, cousin, and Yolanda
Jauregui about which he perjured himself and denied.
You have to be infuriated that he
should be given any benefit and walk the streets again. He has
already been given the moon. How can the government call him a
truthful cooperating witness when he is completely inconsistent with
Yolanda and Ramon Jimenez whom they put on the witness stand and
vouched that they were truthful and honest in the first trial?
Yolanda Jauregui completely denies in
her FBI statement that Abdul Williams ever delivered cocaine for Paul
Bergrin and herself or that he was ever paid by Bergrin or her to
make deliveries, which is a main reason that the government never
called her to the stand during the second trial.
Abdul Williams is above the law thanks
to prosecutors in this case. If Williams gets the 5K1 letter that he
expects in exchange for his false testimony, he may be living next
door to you under an alias and in the WITSEC program.
10 comments:
With respect to you second paragragh,
"Abdul Williams has already been given the benefit of NOT BEING CHARGED WITH ANY HEROIN DISTRIBUTION, only up to 5 kg of cocaine, and none of his murders and shootings. More importantly, while at the Hudson County Jail he set up a 7 kg cocaine transaction that he conducted with his father, cousin, and Yolanda Jauregui about which he perjured himself and denied."
Did this transaction with Yolanda occur while she was incarcerated as well?
Yes Yolanda was missing in action and we all know why, could mr bergrin have called her to the stand under law? She did give testimony last trial also there's other witnesses that's missing.
@Anonymous
I promise that I did not forget your question. The short answer is no, Yolanda was not incarcerated when this transaction took place. However, it comes with a lengthy explanation. I ha to find out some dates and other info and will compose a post tonight and link it for you here.
Great question!
@Aziz - the post will also answer your question on Yolanda and the missing witnesses.
@Anonymous & Aziz:
My latest post should thoroughly answer your questions:
http://paulbergrin.blogspot.com/2013/04/while-out-on-bail.html
Thanks like always i don't know how much to thank you but your always on point and its hard to make a post, statement after reading such material based on facts and proven documents.and trust me i've almost puked plenty of times reading the transcripts and i see the missing witnesses in your post and now understand why they weren't called.
@Aziz
I used to believe (many years ago) that the US criminal justice system was about truth and facts, no matter how much I disagreed with some laws and the War on Drugs. They taught me with my own case that truth and facts are not a consideration, but then the jury showed me that truth does prevail. No matter what sort of a show / production that the government presented in this case, the jurors chose to just believe what prosecutors and their criminal informants stated as if it were the last word and Bergrin was grasping at straws. The judge had to know better, but he chose to allow prosecutors to have their way.
We shall see what the government and the prosecutors choose to do at Bergrin's sentencing soon. Will the truth prevail? I hope so, but I also doubt it.
Still, as of yesterday, there have been no more documents filed in this case. This is extremely unusual as far as I am aware. Perhaps there is hope.
If Abdul is such a scum, how was he considered paralegal material for a law office? You might be a drug dealer if:
1. Your girlfriend is a drug dealer;
2. Your girlfriend's drug dealing brother is an employee of your law firm;
3. You own a restaurant with a drug dealer and then deed it for one dollar;
4. You assign Oscar Cordova to retrieve Mr. Braswell's stolen drug proceeds; and
5. You discuss possible coke deals on tape wherein Oscar would take over the Bronx.
@Craig
I wondered what happened to you. I think I've gotten used to you, odd as it sounds.
Abdul Williams is a violent career criminal and he is scum - no "if" about it. You may want to read my latest post. Abdul was sleeping with Yolanda Jauregui also, so for me it's not too far-fetched to believe that she talked Paul into that move. And then Paul always believed that working in the law office could actually help Mr. Williams. Paul has always been too kindhearted.
1. The former girlfriend (Yolanda Jauregui) clearly stated in a proffer that Bergrin was not aware of her drug dealing and did not assist her in any way, and she's a government cooperator. Obviously it's the reason that the government did NOT call her to the stand in this trial. Again, I refer you to my latest post.
2. Anyone with common sense could figure that out. Yolanda pushed for her brother to wotk in Bergrin's law office because, well, he's her brother. He (Ramon Jimenez) was also not called to testify because he has also stated that Bergrin was not aware of the drug dealing.
3. Yes, Bergrin was fooled by this loose woman and she clearly had him wrapped around her little finger for years. But again, he was not aware of her drug escapades. She most likely demanded that he deed the restaurant to her after the NY Confidential fiasco began as that is indeed the timing.
4. Where in the transcripts is this stated? Braswell is yet another lying sleazebag trying to worm his way out of any sentence and thanks to this jury, he has probably succeeded.
5. But wait - Oscar Cordova, informant extraordinaire, was the son of the Crown of the Latin Kings and supposedly running the organization for daddy. Did he need any sort of discussion with Bergrin to "take over the Bronx"??? Besides, I thought he planned to take over the world and distribute everywhere? That is laughable if you know anything at all about drug trafficking worldwide. Obviously Bergrin was yanking his chain - duh!
Craig, you think so highly of Abdul Williams that I hope he moves next door to you care of WITSEC. lol
So Paul was merely blinded to Yolanda's drug-dealing by his lust, but he knew that Oscar was an informant and hoped to get fees anyway?
When you sleep with someone for that many years, you know how they make their money, their character, their goals. If Paul was smart, he knew Yolanda was trash and a drug dealer. He was okay with such a state only if he was one as well.
Paul and I are both Jewish. We do not mess around with criminals and live with them.
Craig,
Sorry for the delay in posting your comment, but I was cooking dinner.
That may be hard for you to understand, but it's all true. I do not pretend to know if it was lust or love. He knew Yolanda for years before they started a relationship. I only know about Paul Bergrin's personal life as it relates to the case, but I think he left his wife for Yolanda - at least that is the timing on it. He voluntarily gave his wife everything in the divorce, including book and movie rights to his story - that much I do know. The ex-wife remarried rather quickly from what I heard.
You seem to conveniently forget that Yolanda was sleeping with two men that we know of behind Bergrin's back. So how well did he actually know her and how often did they sleep together?
Are you attempting to argue that Begrin invited Castro to move upstairs from the restaurant knowing that Yolanda was involved in a long relationhip with him? I do not buy that one bit - he found out the hard way and as a result of the investigation.
Additionally, if you look closely at Bergrin's situation (and testimony) today, well, he's fallen into a female trap again. He's weak and stupid with women. In my opinion, this one was sent by prosecutors or investigators to disrupt his defense and discover his strategies and once again there was success. I consider myself adept at spotting informants and / or saboteurs, though there are a few people that disagree with me in this current situation.
Last, but certainly not least, being Jewish has nothing to do with anything. Religion really does not belong in any discussion about Bergrin's criminal case.
Post a Comment