Smiling Faces Sometimes

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.


Anonymous said...

Our society is extremely superficial. It is absolutely true that by his actions in
many ways and particularly when defending these innocent soldiers that were going to
be incarcerated by the heads of our country, Paul Bergrin has proved to be a LEADER.
He always was extremely successful in his part as a leader, an incredible attorney
and man. Paul Bergrin is not a follower when it comes to standing up for human rights and defending an innocent person.
Consequently, in this dirty show you hear speaking against him, all these jealous
followers that never had the guts to stand up for what is right like he did.
How many of these supposedly clean attorneys and judges can pretend being as clean
as Paul Bergrin. How many can pretend not having cheated on their wives or enjoyed
sexual favors here and there.
Not only do these supposedly great guys pretend and lie to the population but worse
they also lie to themselves. STOP IT, BECOME TRUE AND REAL FOR ONCE IN YOUR LIVES,

Anonymous said...

Mr. Paul Bergrin should definitively sue the producers of this show for having broadcasted lies on TV with the only intend to dirty his reputation to the eyes
of the public. Not only did they endeavour to hurt him but also did it to hurt

Vicky Gallas said...


That's not how it works. Paul was convicted by a jury and the show only spreads the lies as told by the government. They can do that in the US. Paul's reputation in the eyes of the public is about as bad as it can get, but again, that's because of the government. The jurors were unable to determine truthfulness and chose to believe the lying criminal witnesses that exchanged testimony for freedom.

Hell, I was acquitted on both counts by the jury in my trial and was immediately painted as the criminal that got away with it by the Orlando Sentinel. They lied about the trial and the editor chose to present the story as the state agents wanted it presented, but no lawsuit was possible. Mainstream news organizations present situations as they choose to.

Anyway, Paul's reputation is the least of his problems. In this country, when a person is arrested, the general population considers this proof enough of guilt. Cops or agents of the state said it, so it must be true. For the most part, it is a dumbed-down population, and then you have the other participants that have something to gain - as with this theater production.

Vicky Gallas said...

I meant to add that blogs like this - with real information and documents, trial transcripts etc... are the only way to counter the lies. Why do you think I'm still here posting? Not for my health; that's for sure.