Smiling Faces Sometimes

Sunday, May 19, 2013

Getting to Know Paul Bergrin

I haven't deserted this blog or Paul Bergrin and have spent more time behind the scenes of this case than I did previously. I won't tell you a lie - the verdicts were extremely distressing to me. I still cry when I think about it, so I avoid doing so at times. I have spent more time getting to know Paul and understanding his interactions with people and beyond that, my health is poor and I'm limited in time as a result.

Paul's post trial motion was filed on the 16th of May (an omnibus motion) and he awaits word from the court at this point. You can read the hefty brief here: Bergrin Omnibus Motion 16 May 2013

I will tell you that there is information that the government has hidden in this case, but I imagine that you already guessed that much. With a case like this, the dirt is bound to come out in the wash eventually - we knew it would - and some of it is worse than I thought it could be. I hate secrets and I hate the fact that I can't just spill it here and now, but it is what it is.

If you have arrived at this blog after searching for information on any specific government witness, perhaps not even knowing the party was a witness, this is an appeal to you. We need more information about some of these sleazy government witnesses / criminal informants involved in this case. Contact me and I will put you in touch with the right person.

Paul Bergrin was never a stuffy corporate lawyer and many of you may not be able to identify with him because of that fact. An article that I read online some time ago described Paul as "a courtroom brawler" and that's true. He fought for each client he ever had in a court of law if it was at all possible. Sometimes it wasn't possible as the evidence against the particular client was overwhelming and he utilized his knowledge as a former prosecutor and made the best deal possible.

I asked someone with the defense a question about Paul the other day. The question concerned a tape that prosecutors played for the court - a conversation between Paul and Rakim Baskerville, I believe. Sometimes the discovery was so overwhelming that it was easy to mix-up names, but I think the conversation was with Rakim without spending the next week sifting through transcripts to be 100% sure, but it could also be Rakeem or Hakeem Curry that I'm referring to:

Me: He called him "bro". What's up with that?

Defense friend: Paul called everyone "bro". Nothing unusual there.

Me: Really? Paul referred to clients as "bro"?

Defense friend: Yup, that's Paul. That's who he is.

I realized more about Paul Bergrin from that short conversation than I did reading through documents for an entire month. He was a street lawyer. He identified with his clients. He treated his clients as he did his friends. He's the type of man that would give you the shirt off his back if you needed it. He was the type of attorney that the government needed silenced. It was Paul's background that made him what he was in the arena of law.

By now you've already read enough about Paul's background that I do not need to repeat it here except to say that it was how he grew-up, his home life as a child and teen, and his military background that made him the man he is. Paul's one major weakness, in my eyes, is women. He loves all women and trusts that none will do him any harm. That and now he has turned religious on me. Please don't start rambling religious nonsense at me in emails because that would stop me from responding in the future. I respect your right to your religion as long as you don't expect me to listen to it.

So when was the last time that your attorney called you bro? Sometimes I make excuses for attorneys that are really stuffed shirts. I realize that a certain level of distancing from clients is necessary - this case proves that 10x over - but I have always detested attorneys that consider themselves above the rest of us, and I have encountered many over the years.

Shortly after the verdicts in this case, I contacted a certain law office in my area to ask a question for Paul. Paul needed to know how the attorney worded his FOIA requests in the Antonino Lyons case because most of the documents are not available in PACER. Prior to this attempted contact, I had a high opinion of this attorney and his law offices, probably because of the Lyons case more than anything else, but now consider them nothing more than stuffed shirts and need to remove them from my recommended attorneys list on the other blog. A question so simple and he couldn't manage to attach a doc and email it back or even respond. That's the type of attorney that you don't want. He's above us.

Paul Bergrin was the type of attorney that you do want. His courtroom brawling and ability to deal with everyone on their own level and equally without regard to money made him the man he is today; well, minus the weird religious stuff lately. Never change Paul - because it's not you; it is the government with the problem.

We need more attorneys like Paul Bergrin in the arena of law in the US, because, well, it is indeed an arena. Make no mistake - this fight is far from over and this is the gladiatorial combat of our time. My bet is still on Paul.


Anonymous said...


I hope you are in good health. And you are appreciated for your honest work.

As for Paul's motion I believe it was an exemplary piece of work and should most definitely be granted. I highly doubt the judge will put an acquittal to some of the charges (obviously because of political pressure) but I'm highly confident he will grant a new trial.

What is needed to be known about these witnesses? I thought we knew everything about their untruthful testimony.

Vicky Gallas said...

I'm glad you have confidence in Judge Cavanaugh's fairness because I sure don't. The way he rushed Paul through this trial, do you truly believe he would grant a new one? The theme of this trial was 'hurry, hurry, hurry' as soon as it was the defense's turn. He was in such a hurry that he couldn't wait for witnesses that the government successfully hid from the defense. If you read the transcripts, it's clear that the judge viewed the trial as over when the government rested their case. Additionally, most (if not all) defense witnesses were borderline ridiculed - the judge and prosecutors had the jury laughing at them.

I think that we do know much of the untruthful testimony, but the statement in the post is more a reference to undisclosed information. There is new evidence. I think there is more information out there that we are missing and intend to state an appeal to the public in my next post this evening.

Jessica said...

Thanks for the update…I think when your life is taken without an opportunity for bail u can own reflect on your life and for some God is the way…I’m not religious but I can understand him trying to make sense of what happen...He is going to have a tough road and maybe he is reflecting on his life…I’m a mom of three and would die if I lost five or ten years of their life because of false accusations. At the end of the day he has a long and uncertain road and maybe he is trying to stay positive…this trail was not fair…even the jury admitted to having knowledge of the case and the article…If his worst mistake was the company he kept than it’s pretty sad…I’m sorry that Yolanda chick was disgusting for having those relationships all at the same time but he had to know something was up. Take care of yourself Vicki…this blog is very informative.

Anonymous said...

I have known paul for 25yrs. He was never more thrn a gentleman every time i ead in his comp. One thing i do no nevrr count him out believe me.

Craig from Florida said...

Paul had no boundaries, which is a common trait of sociopathy. Nothing was off-limits. Paul wanted to win at any cost. Paul played with fire for years. The trial witnesses who were career criminals had a strong rapport with Bergrin based on Paul's willingness to break the rules. When Paul's family and future generations look back, they will recall Paul Bergrin as a man who went to the dark side and never came back. I wish he was innocent.

Vicky Gallas said...


Don't know who you are, but I'd bet money that you have a connection to this case. Paul Bergrin is INNOCENT, but then you'd know that if you had taken the time to read the transcripts and you had an open mind.

And I still hope that one of the MANY career criminal informants that received a 'get out of jail free' pass in exchange for false testimony in this case moves in next door to you. ;-,

Craig from Florida said...

Vicky, I read the trial transcript. Paul believed Oscar was a criminal. Paul never even patted the guy down for a recorder. Paul was sloppy and greedy. Paul never investigated Oscar. What lawyer would joke about murdering witnesses? Paul would get more money if he has to confront the witness at trial. Paul's argument that Yolanda is a drug dealer but Paul was not was entrusted to the jury. Paul paid for the restaurant. Cocaine was delivered to the restaurant one day after the defendants were rounded up. I am unconnected to the case. I am merely a lawyer who practices in Florida. I see a lot of evidence from which the jury could draw inferences to support the verdict. Obviously, the jury believed that Paul was willing to use murder to silence witnesses. Paul sold and conspired to sell kilos of cocaine on a wholesale basis to a number of career criminals. Paul held money for a drug dealer in his office. In terms of a Movie, the Bergrin case is a cross between Wall Street and Scarface.

Vicky Gallas said...


You're talking to someone that toyed with every informant that agents ever had dial her. I made some of the most outrageous statements that you'll ever come across. The worst of my outrageous statements resulted in my arrest when the main case agent figured it would have jury appeal for prosecutors. I did testify in my defense though and cleared-up the reasons for the lengthy statement. When the jury deliberated, they requested that tape and apparently they could tell that I was just really angry with the warped agents that harassed me for so many years.

Besides, the hard drive (untouched) was in the trunk of my car, which was in the courthouse parking garage as I testified. Obviously I never bashed it with a hammer like I said in that crazy statement on the phone.

Obviously you have never been abused, harassed, and pursued by an informant at the hands of scheming agents that seek to bury you.

Craig from Florida said...

Ironically, when Oscar talked about his "unilateral" plan to kill witnesses, Paul and Vinny should have contacted the FBI and made a deal to cooperate and shorten Vinny's sentence. Indeed, Vinny had outed almost everyone upon his arrest. Instead, when Oscar arrived and promised money, Paul and Vinny joined the fake conspiracy to obtain money for a defense strategy predicated on the absence of Junior the Panamanian and the Truck Driver. If the events depicted at trial aired as a movie, it would have an ending which makes no sense unless Paul promised an acquittal to Vinny (which he never expected) based on witnesses dying.

Vicky Gallas said...

@Craig from Florida

Have I ever mentioned that I really hope one of the many violent career criminal informants that received a 'get out of jail free' pass in exchange for false testimony in this case moves next door to you? I'm serious dude.

All of this movie talk reminds me of a man I've read too much about in case docs. His name is Richie. As a matter of fact, I'm not the only one that believes this case was created for such a movie. Numerous government witnesses and others that support Paul Bergrin have made such statements.

I could say stuff about Oscar, the informant that you believe and admire, that would (hopefully) turn your stomach, but I won't; at least not yet. ;)