Paul Bergrin Needs Help: Where is the Real FBI and DOJ

This case is so convoluted that it requires a team of real attorneys (JAG and criminal practice) and actual former or retired FBI, DEA, and DOJ investigators. They would need a large room and a physical (as opposed to computer spreadsheet) board the size of a wall to track each and every issue and every party the Newark US Attorney's Office labeled witness or informant in the duration of this case, which is approaching 10 years at this point, and actually much longer if we are to count initial investigations.

Where is mainstream media? Am I the only person still actually researching this case? Am I the only one not afraid to speak against the tyrannical government and malicious prosecutions in this country? Do investigative journalists still exist or was the entire profession eliminated long ago?

I know there are real attorneys out there. I know that there are investigators who actually investigate. Where are you? Did the government scare you away? Did you read 10 pages and decide it was too much work? Taking on any part of this case requires extensive reading and research. I understand that it won't be an easy ordeal. Paul Bergrin needs your help. Please step-up to the plate!

From the very beginning to date this entire case against Paul Bergrin is a farce. Again though, actual reading and research is required to reach this conclusion. In case you are wondering what our tyrants are doing now, I will tell you...

A friend sends Paul money on occasion to assist him with his costs of document production and mailing as well as purchase of necessary commissary items with whatever is remaining. The BOP (Bureau of Prisons), the warden at Florence ADMAX, and no doubt the DOJ, decided to steal what little money Paul Bergrin receives to cover everything in his life as it is today. So not only is this friend unable to have any contact with Paul whatsoever, these low-life creeps have decided to steal the money she sends to him.

Bergrin Colorado Civil Case March 15 2018

Bergrin Colorado Civil Case Order March 19 2018

Somehow I doubt that Paul Bergrin is their only victim.

Where are Paul's many friends, fellow soldiers, fellow veterans, JAG attorneys, attorneys, judges, and actual investigators who know the real Paul Bergrin? He is in the H-Unit in Florence ADMAX (the Supermax) in Florence, Colorado. He has been there under SAMs (Special Administrative Measures) since November 1, 2016, and is in solitary confinement. Paul is drowning and he needs your help!

Oh and while I'm posting, here is the government response to Paul's 400 page handwritten response:

Bergrin 2255 Government Response April 4, 2018

 

Paul Bergrin is still the same great man you knew before this malicious, absurd prosecution was concocted with the assistance of, and government collusion with, criminal informants. Please do not let him down.

Government Corruption and Lies: End of Year (2017) Statement

This is a short post to address the corruption, lies, and misinformation of the US government that so many are acutely aware of but conveniently ignore on a regular basis. Just a few paragraphs with links to significant documents for your reading pleasure over the holidays. Each of the documents will be addressed in-depth in January of 2018 in separate posts on this blog.

The government (specifically Sanders) has responded to Paul Bergrin's 2255 petition. Steven Sanders left the Newark US Attorney's Office in September 2016, as far as I am aware and according to the bio on the Gibbons Law website, to work with Gibbons Law, the same firm that Larry Lustberg is with. Sanders composed the government response to the 2255 petition filed on November 30, 2017. This makes little sense, but thus far no one has explained it.

The response to the 2255 petition is nothing but more spin, lies, and misinformation. I can easily dispute numerous parts of this document right here, and actually already have. If you have read every post on this blog, you are already aware of that. Paul Bergrin is suffering in Florence, Colorado ADMAX (yes, the Supermax) under a SAMs designation. Paul is incommunicado. If you write him, he will never receive your letters. The government has a lot to hide. Without further ado, here is the 1858 page response:

Bergrin 2255 Government Response November 30 2017

Is the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) a Criminal Organization

 

Anyone who lived in Miami in the 80s knows something about the story of Salvador Magluta and Willie Falcon. Falcon was recently released from the BOP and is in ICE custody, in Louisiana I believe, as the US government is attempting to deport him to Cuba. Sal Magluta is in Florence ADMAX (yes, the Supermax) and has been through more than anyone could imagine.

Before you fall for the outrageous government spin concerning Sal Magluta, note that his 195 year sentence is for money laundering. You got that right. Money laundering. Not importing drugs or murder or any other crazy crap the government claims him to be guilty of. The jury convicted him on numerous counts of money laundering, many of which simply involved him paying his attorneys. Truth be told, Magluta was more of a Robinhood type – he spread the wealth around. Sure, he had his faults, but no one who actually knew him believes that he belongs in Florence ADMAX serving a 195 year sentence.

I came across Magluta's many cases against the BOP when researching what they really do to inmates in Florence ADMAX. Magluta's attorney recently jumped ship, mainly because he was not being paid and the staff at Florence ADMAX made communications impossible via telephone and in-person. There was nothing more that the attorney could do for him.

The document linked herein is written by Sal Magluta as a declaration in the current case against the BOP and filed in July of 2017. There is much personal medical information in the declaration, so I've been on the fence about posting it, but I must believe that Sal Magluta wants the people to know what the government is doing to him or he wouldn't have filed it:

Magluta Declaration July 24 2017

 

If reading a non-fiction book about the Miami scene back in the late 70s and throughout the 80s appeals to you, make sure to read Roben Farzad's recently released book, Hotel Scarface: Where Cocaine Cowboys Partied and Plotted to Control Miami. I will save the discussion of Magluta's case(s) against the BOP for a new post.

Happy reading and happy holidays!

Vicky Gallas 

Website Gone

Unfortunately, the PaulBergrin.info website has been hacked. This happened some time during the last 7 days. I went ahead and removed the pages, and therefore all links, to documents and the trial transcripts for trial 1 and trial 2. I still have all of the original documents and will work on uploading to a different website in the next few weeks.

So, who would do this? Well, call me a conspiracy theorist if you wish, but the only party that doesn't want the real information out there for public view is.... the government. Apparently they can't get through Google or this blog would be gone too. It had to be a brute force attack because I had a weird password on the website, one that I couldn't remember and always had to look it up.

Any links to documents or trial transcripts from this blog and within blog posts will no longer work. If you want something in particular contact me by leaving a comment, which I won't publish, with your request and your email address. I will email you first to make sure the request and the email address are valid.

EDIT on February 6 2017 @9PM -

I feel the need to clarify the situation here. The only website with a problem is paulbergrin.info and it will disappear completely tomorrow (Feb. 7th). This website had the transcripts from trial 1 and trial 2, letter from Paul, and all appeal documents from long after trial. All motions and other case documents published through late 2013, after the second trial, are still accessible by clicking on the "Documents" link on the top of this page.

The Paul Bergrin website didn't exist until after the second trial and I never moved the documents from my own website. My own website (accusedmadam.com) is secure and is hosted through a different company. The paulbergrin.info website was hosted on Go Daddy servers along with a couple of other websites I own.

I will add any important recent documents to my own website soon and correct the links in posts, but will probably not add the trial transcripts.to it. If you want the transcripts, follow the above instructions. I figure that anyone who wanted to read them already has them - it has been years - close to 4 years since the end of trial # 2.

Also, to clarify, I do not believe that taking down the website was any sort of government project. More likely it was someone saying something to someone else, like, 'it sure would be great if that site disappeared' and the wish was granted. So not a conspuracy, but more of a wish that happened. After all is said and done, the transcripts and documents hold the truth of the case. With all of that gone, the Paul Bergrin saga becomes the next Hollywood movie that reads much like the fictional documentary.

But no worries... in time all will be good.

Paul Bergrin Still Awaiting Response

The attorney who wrote this stupid post is not only in "SmallLaw" as he refers to it, he also has a small mind. It's funny  (not funny haha) how wording and context evolve depending on who's telling the story. According to Mr SmallMind, Paul Bergrin made the No Kemo, No case statement to a client. The government claimed he made it to a group of people, who all deny it with one exception, on Avon Street in Newark on an unknown date.. Paul's client at the time was William Baskerville, who was sitting in a jail cell. At least get the LIES straight!

A main reason that I am writing this post is that I am sick and tired of the lies, misinformation and spin in this case and the connected cases. So if you want to write BS in support of the government, better research first.

Article that I'm referring to:

The 5 Worst Types of SmallLaw Lawyers 

http://abovethelaw.com/2017/01/the-5-worst-types-of-smalllaw-lawyers/

Beyond that, there are 2 main types of criminal defense attorneys: plea bargain attorneys and trial attorneys. Of course there are also motion attorneys, appeal attorneys and attorneys who specialize. 

The writer of the article reveals his failure to research and is not an attorney I'd hire for anything. What a clown, but not really a funny one - a government tool used by prosecutors grasping at straws over their inability to respond to Paul Bergrin's Rule 33 as US District Judge Jose Linares grants their 3rd or 4th extension request, which reads just like the previous requests - except they defend it a little more and apologize an extra time or two in the latest one. For the record, Paul Bergrin would vehemently object to any additional extensions, because as he stated in a previous letter to the Court, the government has had years to get it together, BUT Paul Bergrin is currently in the Colorado Supermax and incommunicado.

The only one to ever claim that Paul Bergrin made the statement, No Kemo, No case, is the alleged Kemo shooter, Anthony Young. Young claimed he said it during a street meeting late at night in Newark, on Avon Street, with an audience of 4 to 6 people (number varies according to who is stating it). There never was any meeting on Avon Street late at night. The government fails to pin this alleged meeting to a date because if they did, the alleged participants could easily prove they were all elsewhere.

Young never in any way fit the description of the shooter and only claimed to be the perp to eliminate his legal problems and get into the federal witness protection program, start a new life etc... There is someone who actually did fit the description of the shooter though and he has since (recently - in 2016) admitted to being at the scene when Kemo was murdered. He was also identified by Kemo's other stepfather  (Spruill) as threatening him with a gun at the street memorial for Kemo days after the murder. Newark PD was investigating this person for the murder, but handed the investigation over to AUSA John Gay and FBI SA Shawn Manson Brokos. 

Who is the real candidate for shooter? Shawn McPhall, a Newark career criminal and probably an informant. Why do I say he's probably an informant? Because the documents revealed him to be a prime candidate for Kemo's murder, but the AUSA and FBI SA just buried the information. Neither William Baskerville or Paul Bergrin were given the documents in discovery prior to or during trial, or since for that matter. Now why would an FBI SA and an AUSA bury investigation information pointing to the real shooter? Yup, that's the only reason I can see. 

McPhall also fits the description given by Johnnie Davis, the only living eyewitness to the murder. However, the AUSA and the FBI SA also failed to show Davis an umage of McPhall and the Newark PD cannot be blamed as their investigation was turned over to the feds. The reports in question:

Spruill Reports

William Baskerville is still awaiting the ruling in his 2255 Petition. I will be posting about the connection of the Spruill Reports and the government's failure to turn over in discovery, which is a Brady violation, in the coming week.

EDIT on January 22, 2017 @11PM EST

From time to time I might add relevant information to this post below.

IMPORTANT NOTES

1. Oddly enough, both of Kemo's stepfathers look alike. Johnnie Davis was with Kemo when he was gunned down on the street. Christopher Spruill was mistaken for Davis when Shawn McPhall encountered him at the memorial days later.

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.

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.

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. 

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.

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.

Career Criminal Rondre Kelly Strikes Again

Shortly before Paul Bergrin's second trial, Rondre Kelly was sentenced to 14 years for his heroin trafficking case in Pittsburgh. Kelly received one more of those 'get out of jail free' passes apparently via motions filed by the government after he testified (or rather testilied) against Paul Bergrin in February of 2013.

According to this article published in December of 2014, we know he was free at that time:

Forks Township man chases girlfriend with knife, says jail worth it for 'dismantling' her face, police report

So here is a government witness that was given extensive time off across numerous jurisdictions (NY and PA) over his heroin and cocaine trafficking that began decades earlier and was never charged at all with his drug trafficking in New Jersey in thanks for his "cooperation" against Paul Bergrin.

Rondre Kelly, career criminal, was facing numerous (4) charges in the attack on his girlfriend (Kyaysha Weatherington) of four months and thinks that jail time was worth it. Well, he only thinks that because he knows he can get off with a minor sentence or no jail time at all by dialing his contact in the Newark US Attorney's Office. Rondre Kelly is a friend to the US government and the US DOJ loves him.

Will this career criminal walk on charges AGAIN? When I call this idiot a career criminal, I mean it. The jury in Bergrin's second trial actually believed this POS! Don't just believe me on his life of crime, read his testimony in the trial transcripts as it is fed to him by prosecutors in this case:

BERGRIN 13 2_07_13 - Rondre Kelly testimony on Direct begins on page 2854 and concludes for the day on page 2914.

BERGRIN 14 02_11_13 - Rondre Kelly testimony on Direct begins again on page 2968. Paul Bergrin's Cross-Examination of Rondre Kelly begins on page 3037.


In answer to my own question above, yes, Rondre Kelly walked again! For the attack on his girlfriend he received 12 months probation. What a bad joke the US criminal justice system really is. No wonder all of these crimes are "worth it" to Kelly! Read the docket sheets and the summary and see for yourself:

Rondre Kelly Docket

Rondre Kelly Docket 2

Rondre Kelly Court Summary


I couldn't even make this crap up. His ex-girlfriend should be filing a civil suit. Oh, and thanks so much to the jury for believing this career criminal. May he one day move next door to anyone that had the audacity to give him one of his many free passes.

For the record, if not for an attempt to post an extremely hateful comment on this blog by a person claiming to be Rondre Kelly's brother, no one would have bothered to look at this career criminal again. After a thorough reread of the above-linked trial transcripts, I realized that the brother would be one Floyd Kelly, also a career criminal given free passes for Rondre Kelly's testimony against Paul Bergrin and other defendants along the way. So, thanks for bringing this matter to our attention Floyd.

And Floyd, you may want to actually read these trial transcripts because brother Rondre didn't enter into a real estate transaction to buy your mom a house, at least not according to his own testimony. Of course your comment was not published as it violated my comment rules.

To the people of Pennsylvania: Good luck; you're going to need it with Rondre Kelly stalking the streets.
 

Paul Bergrin Suffering Abuse

It looks like I will be reviving this blog in short time. Paul Bergrin was awaiting a transfer to Coleman 1 USP in Florida until he was recently informed that there was a change in plan and he'd be going to USP Tucson. He is currently suffering in the Federal Transfer Center in Oklahoma City.

Paul Bergrin has been at the Federal Transfer Center in Oklahoma City for 10 weeks now! He is being abused by the Newark US Attorney’s Office and this abuse has continued care of BOP. He is now the longest detainee in transit in the unit. I will be reviving the blog in short time to expose the treatment he has suffered at the hands of many. Shame on all involved – from AUSA Gay to the FTC director to the low-level employees that are participating in this abuse!

What the sort of crap place is this country? What sort of excuses for human beings run this rotten, corrupt system? Well, this blog has been read by people around the world and it will soon be time to use it to bring attention to the reality of this so-called "land of the free"!

And of course Paul has been obstructed in all legal work on his case. For that matter, they won't even send out his legal mail at FTC Oklahoma City. Perhaps I will publish the 2013 trial transcripts again too. We shall see what transpires over the next few days.


Looks like we're back!

False and Misleading Evidence

A supplement to the defense letter dated 3 July, 2013, was filed on behalf of Paul Bergrin this morning. This is the first document in this case that was not filed by Bergrin's stand-by counsel Mr. Lustberg, and the reason for this is that time is of the essence. Paul Bergrin was found guilty on all counts by a jury deceived by the government; however, he has not been convicted.

An excerpt from the supplemental brief:

It is a sad day for our criminal justice system when the government pathetically and desperately submits a recantation letter such as the one of 3 July, and a letter with the contents contained in the one of 10 July; knowing they contain misleading, atrocious and blatant inaccuracies. Their misguided reliance on the December 4, date as the date of the meeting, proves they wrongfully pursued Bergrin and should not have relied on Young; a witness proven to be unbelievable. It further establishes that their underlying theory of the case and the fact pertaining to an alleged meeting on December 4, was absurd and misguided.

Read the entire brief here:

Bergrin Supplemental Brief 15 July 2013

Note that I have uploaded the brief to a new website that is not yet complete. When the site is finished soon, I will introduce it here.

Government Actors Without Conscience

Someone is angry; that's for sure. The government filed a scathing 3-page letter responding to Paul Bergrin's last defense letter and attached a telephone recording transcript to it dated November 25, 2003 - the date of William Baskerville's arrest. The letter:

Bergrin Trial Govt Letter 10 July 2013

The transcript reveals Bergrin telling Hakeem Curry that Baskerville was facing life and is intended to create doubt about the later recordings that state differently. Obviously, at least to me, Paul Bergrin actually believed that William Baskerville faced life as a result of government paperwork and statements on the day of the arrest and then by December 4, 2003, the date of the other wiretap transcripts posted on this blog, realized that this was not the situation and knew he could deal the case for a 12-13 year sentence.

A read of the government's acrimonious letter would make the unaware believe that they'd uncovered serious evidence contradicting defense statements on the topic of the Curry wiretrap transcripts. Actually, the situation is quite the opposite and the attached transcript reveals the natural progression of a criminal case in the US courts. At first glance, the case looked real bad for Will, but a week later it was just another overzealous US prosecution.

Furthermore, Bergrin certainly did not "cherry-pick" the calls included in the earlier defense letter. The specific call transcripts clearly reveal the progress of the case and that Bergrin clearly told Curry that he could get Will a deal for 12-13 years, nine days after the initial arrest. The calls also reveal that no meeting on a street corner was ever mentioned between Bergrin and Curry as of December 4, 2003.

The government letter also seems to threaten to provide transcripts of all of the 33,000+ suppressible calls. Take note that Paul Bergrin has nothing to hide and welcomes such a move. I do realize that the defense letter dated 3 July 2013, mentioned concern about "opening the door," however, Paul Bergrin did not compose it - perhaps Mr. Lustberg's secretary did. No telling who specifically composed it, but there is no fear of any proof favoring the government's argument in the content of any of these calls.

And how exactly is it that 33,000+ calls are suppressible in the Baskerville and Curry cases anyway? In that I know what the Oscar Cordova recordings went through, I cannot even begin to imagine what agents did to result in all of those calls being suppressed. I mean really - if you read the transcripts of Oscar's trial testimony, you know that most of the exchanges recorded between him and Bergrin were unintelligible and transcribed as U/I.

And then there's the fact that it was SA Shawn Brokos that transcribed all of the Oscar tapes to begin with. There was no real transcription of those recordings as they really are unintelligible for the most part. What happens is you hear a small part of a statement by Bergrin which results in the entire conversation being taken out of context. Even the expert knew there were serious anomalies with the tapes. Yet these recordings were not suppressible.

So what exactly makes 33,000+ recordings suppressible? The government makes statements about sealing being an issue. As if Oscar Cordova's recordings were properly sealed! Once the little creep didn't hand a recording to an agent for nine days, so let's not pretend anything Oscar the criminal informant did was monitored by agents; the situation was much the opposite.

But the worst part of the government's letter is the part that expresses a lack of concern as to the truthfulness of Anthony Young's testimony and justifies it with legal citations. They say that it doesn't matter whether Young's testimony was corroborated or not and his word alone is enough to convict Paul Bergrin. A violent career criminal informant makes a statement intended to assist the government agenda and call recordings reveal that it is a false statement about a street corner meeting that never happened and the government says that this is immaterial. Is this not "victory at all costs"?

Initially, Bergrin refuses to accept that “uncorroborated accomplice testimony may constitutionally provide the exclusive basis for a criminal conviction.” United States v. DeLarosa, 450 F.2d 1057 (3d Cir. 1971). Young testified that Bergrin came to a meeting at Avon Avenue and 17th Street after Thanksgiving in 2003 and effectively instructed the Curry Organization to murder McCray. 9T2249-54. That testimony, if credited by a rational jury, alone suffices to uphold Bergrin’s convictions for the McCray murder. See United States v. Pendleton, 636 F.3d 78, 84 (3d Cir. 2011). Whether other evidence supported or contradicted Young was for the jury to decide.

I thought that the government was supposed to represent the people. According to these government actors, the truth is immaterial. Their courtroom tactics and hand-picked judge sealed Paul Bergrin's fate, or so they believe at the moment. When they managed to get USDJ William Martini recused in this case, the victory was in close reach and all they had to do was fool a naive jury in a hurry.

Of course Paul Bergrin has a response to this scathing letter of misinformation and you'll hear it soon.

Defense Response to December 4 Retraction

If you have read the last several posts on this blog, then you're already aware of the importance of pinning the government to the date of December 4, 2003, as the date Anthony Young claimed the Avon street meeting took place and as they have asserted affirmatively in their last brief. 

The government took 9 years to state a date and previously it was "after Thanksgiving 2003," which is about as vague as they could possibly get. Young did claim in previous testimony that it was 3 or 4 days after Thanksgiving. In yet other statements, the government stated it as after Thanksgiving and before Christmas 2003, so we are crystal clear that it was not in February.

This is what happens when a witness (i.e. violent criminal informant seeking a 'get out of jail free' pass) offers completely false testimony of events that never occurred. They're forever trying desperately to make the date fit the timeline. In this situation, it's the government that is desperate to make the pieces of the puzzle fit together and they have failed miserably.

The government suborned perjury and knowingly presented false testimony. The assertion of the date to make their point in the brief also depicts the fact that they are intentionally deceiving the Court and thwarting the system of justice by attempting to strengthen that date by emphasizing it. They are caught in a web of lies. In their response letter dated 1 July, 2013, there is also mention of a total of 3 calls on December 4th. All 3 calls are transcribed:

Curry Wiretap Transcript

Remaining December 4 Calls Transcribed

Mr. Lustberg has written a letter to the Court that best describes the situation in its entirety:

Bergrin Defense Letter 3 July 2013

How much more will the Court allow the government to get away with? Time will tell. The defense awaits the Court's ruling and only possible resolution to this serious matter. Paul Bergrin was never on Avon Street advising a group of alleged gang members in the dark on any date. As an attorney, Bergrin's idea of fighting for his clients clearly involved zealous argument in a court of law, as it should.

Anthony Young = total fail and it's obvious that Paul Bergrin never conspired with anyone to murder FBI informant Kemo Deshawn McCray. Of course this taints the entire indictment for reasons that should be obvious to you.

And then there are so many questions remaining in relation to these tens of thousands of inadmissible wiretap recordings from the Hakeem Curry case. More on that soon... with documents of course.

Oh and happy Fourth of July --- mentioning freedoms and therefore the United States Constitution (and the Fourth Amendment in this case), if I find out that these whacks have anything to do with my missing snail mail (from business and personal addresses), well, as they're aware, I always loudly denounce injustice and always demand accountability. I learned long ago that there are few actual coincidences in life.

December 4 Now Retracted

What did I anticipate in my last post? The changing of the date of the meeting on a street corner that Anthony Young testified about. The last post: What the Curry WiretapTranscript Reveals

As if on cue, the government is now claiming the date referred to in the response brief has been retracted and they offer their heartfelt apology. Apparently, the infamous street corner meeting has now been returned to a vague period of time defined as, "After Thanksgiving 2003," if you can imagine that. Of course there is no possible way of tracking down the specific location of all men alleged to be at this street corner meeting in the dark on an unnamed date after Thanksgiving.

The lying perjurers have now retracted the real date stated by the AUSA. Clearly it was a huge screw-up to finally note an actual date. The are such liars. Read the lying explanation:

Bergrin Trial Govt Letter 1 July 2013

Did I call it or what? We all knew it would happen. They must have scrambled around like cockroaches after they read the defense motion and eventually settled on a quick apology to the Court and a retraction. Sick stuff.

GD f'ing cockroaches. You know there's a great book by Dean Koontz titled, "Dark Rivers of the Heart" - it's fiction, but AUSA John Gay reminds me of the Roy Miro character. A friend gave me a copy of this book not once, but twice - once in 2000, and again in 2003, in relation to my own agent cockroach. It's the Roy Miro storyline that's relevant here and not the Spencer background story. Interesting read if you have the time.

The Blind and Unbridled Ambition of a Narcissistic FBI Agent

KEMO’S CHOICE: If you don’t become a Government informant, I will arrest your mother.  
   
No exaggeration. That was how Kemo DeShawn McCray came to be a confidential informant.   
   
To say Special Agent Shawn Brokos was “ambitious” in recruiting Kemo to work as a CI doesn’t quite cut it. Just before Brokos recruited McCray, she was coming off the high of basking in the heavenly glory of formal commendations for her successful investigation into street gangs. 
   
Seemingly starved for more recognition, Brokos set her sight on new opportunities for advancement. Her unbridled and narcissistic ambition led her straight into the home Kemo shared with his mother. 
   
In her testimony in the U.S. v. William Baskerville case, Brokos shamelessly described how she schemed, manipulated, lied and forced Kemo into the dangerous life of being an informant. But don’t take my word for it. Here are her own words straight from her testimony in the Baskerville case:

…I had worked with a long-time informant by the name of …and…he suggested to me on several occasions that…Kemo McCray might be very useful to use because he has some very good inside knowledge as to this set of Crips we’re looking at…[we] spoke at length about Kemo helping us out in this investigation.  In the midst of these discussions, we weren’t sure how to approach it, …called me and said Kemo is hiding a gun in …apartment.  That very day I got some agents...went to the apartment…the gun was exactly where … said it would be. 
   
…Initially, Kemo denied that the gun was his and (his mother) tried to say that the gun was hers.  So we went through several different interviews trying to ascertain whose gun this was, knowing full well it was Kemo’s…Kemo actually ran out the back door and…we could not find him.…I spoke to (Kemo’s mother) … and told her that if Kemo does not come forward, we’re going to have to charge her because she was saying the gun was hers and we knew it wasn’t…

…we (actually) weren’t certain whether or not we could charge this as anything because it wasn’t a federal crime…it was a very weak case…
   
…So I explained (to Kemo’s mother to) tell Kemo we just want to talk to him about this gun and see if he’ll come in…convince Kemo to do the right thing. 
   
…She brought him to our office, we sat down with Kemo…He said he would like to help himself out…He admitted the gun was his and from that day forward we began our working relationship…and…he started his work with us…(and we told him) we would do everything we could to protect his safety.

 A “working relationship.” Really? I am not sure I would call it a working relationship. She threatens to file criminal charges against his mother, charges she knows there is no legal basis to file and then tells a jury that Kemo said he “would like to help himself out.” Does that make you want to vomit or what?  
   
I wonder if Kemo’s family knew the federal government never had any intention of charging Kemo and that Brokos was flat out lying to manipulate Kemo into being an informant.
   
In his first six months on the job, Kemo bought drugs from about 15 gang members. All of them were arrested. Like most confidential informants, Kemo never had to testify in the prosecution of these individuals. Hence the term “confidential informant” (as opposed to confidential witness) their identity is almost never revealed in drug cases. Usually cases are dismissed before a prosecutor will disclose who a CI is. This is such common knowledge that it makes the claim Paul Bergrin made the statement “no Kemo, no case” completely moronic. But hey, John Q. Jurors bought it, so who am I to say?
   
After Kemo scored big for Brokos in just six months, Brokos didn’t even let the poor kid rest. She was worse than Kathy Lee Gifford with her slave-driving child labor sweatshops.  
   
In January of 2003, Kemo began buying drugs from William Baskerville while wearing a body wire. All of these buys were surveilled by the FBI and recorded by video or audio. There were at least 35 tapes capturing Baskerville selling drugs to Kemo.
   
Forgetting the promise to protect Kemo and showing her gross incompetency and total disregard for Kemo’s’ safety, Brokos had Kemo buy drugs in smaller quantities than what Baskerville regularly sold. Big mistake and one that would cost Kemo his life.
   
Second big mistake. Brokos was impatient. Kemo didn’t have a phone one day, but a buy would have to be made. So instead of getting the kid a new phone, she gave Kemo her fellow agent and boyfriend’s cellphone number to leave for a dealer to call him back on. I am sure the dealer was just a little concerned when the phone he expects Kemo to answer goes into a voicemail greeting, “This is Agent so and so of the FBI…”
   
Can you imagine the conversation between Kemo and Brokos when that faux pas is discovered... Oops! OMG Kemo. Sorry about that. Oh well! No biggy. Don’t worry about it. You’re going to be toast soon anyway. In the meantime, do me a big one would ya? Let’s get out there and squeeze in a few more buys so I can get me some more of them good ol’ commendations. Thanks a mill’!

And that brings us to November 25, 2003, the day the FBI arrested William Baskerville. The arrest complaint might as well have had Kemo’s name in neon flashing lights. With one read, Baskerville immediately knew it was Kemo who had set him up. He knew it because the quantities Baskerville sold Kemo were so little. Big mistake Brokos. Big. 
   
Baskerville tells his attorney who the CI is as any reasonable drug dealer who was just arrested would do. And the attorney who happened to be Baskerville’s attorney, as we all now know, was Paul Bergrin.
   
After court, Bergrin called Baskerville’s cousin Hakeem Curry and told him, “Will said the guy’s name was K-Mo.” That’s the big recording??? That’s the act that set into motion the execution of a federal witness. Really? No wonder they didn’t charge Bergrin when they indicted Baskerville in 2005. They needed to throw in a whole bunch of other accusations they could find over a ten year period to throw them to the wall at once to see if they would stick like spaghetti. Tragically, it worked.
   
Getting back to Kemo, while Baskerville is being set up, Kemo began using the money Brokos was giving him to use and deal drugs on his own. At some point after Brokos found out, she fired Kemo as an informant. This convenient firing of Kemo for being a drug using drug dealer just happened to occur after Baskerville’s arrest and after word was out on the streets that Kemo was working for the feds. 
   
After being hunted on the streets for a few months, Kemo pleaded with Brokos for protection. Brokos must have given him a, “Yeah, I’ll get right on that as soon as I am done dusting off my medals.” At the Baskerville trial, she claimed some nonsense as having gotten tied up in red tape and unable to get Kemo into protective custody quickly enough. Why she did not just arrest Kemo for his drug dealing and keep him safe is beyond me. Wasn’t he such a necessary witness???
   
But maybe it wasn’t the red tape. Maybe it was that Brokos didn’t need Kemo anymore. They had 35 tapes. Why did they need a witness when they had 35 Tapes of Baskerville making drug deals? 
   
Instead of taking Kemo into safety as Brokos promised Kemo --- as she looked into the eyes of Kemo’s mother and promised -- she let him be hunted on the streets like an animal. After three months, that hunt came to an end. On March 2, 2004, Kemo was executed on the street by a black male with shoulder length dreadlocks. 
   
Here’s the horrific truth folks: This ruthless agent threw Kemo to the wolves because he was no use to her anymore. He lost his credibility. There would be no more commendations that Kemo could help Brokos earn. He was dispensable. He had served her purpose and she could not be bothered.     

Brokos’ dispensability of Kemo reminds of that famous quote from Arthur Miller in Death of a Salesman. “A man is not an orange. You can't eat the fruit and throw the peel away.”
   
Someone needs to tell Brokos that CIs are not orange peels that can be thrown away when they are of no use to her anymore.

One wonders how she sleeps at night. Probably doesn’t lose a wink. Cops like Brokos don’t care if they get people killed in their quest to wear a few more medals on their chest. When they get caught, they blame someone else. They use people like Paul Bergrin as a scapegoat to hide their despicable conduct. Thank God, the majority of law enforcement agents and prosecutors really do work to protect society from the bad guys out there. 

Regardless of whatever is written about Paul Bergrin, history will be a much harsher judge of Shawn Brokos. It’s the Shawn Brokos’ of the world people in every part of the globe worry about. These people will stop at nothing to win at any cost and abuse their power. And they make the good guys who deserve to wear the white hats look really, really bad.


NOTE: It should be obvious to anyone that's read much of anything I have written and/or knows me that I did not write this post. The party that did is anonymous to anyone except me. Why should it be obvious? I sure do not believe that any of the government people involved in any of these cases wears a white hat or are the good guys in any way, shape or form. Furthermore, I have exactly zero trust for anyone in law enforcement in this country. The US system is a sham. Additionally, I do not believe that William Baskerville was ever a danger to Kemo or anyone else. There is solid evidence that he was wrongfully convicted on everything related to the Kemo Deshawn McCray murder.

While Out on Bail

Upon Yolanda Jauregui's arrest on May 20, 2009, she made bail and was released. On May 21, 2009. Her lover Alejandro (Barraza-Castro), his brother Lorenzo, and Yolanda's father were arrested when 53 kilograms of cocaine were delivered to 710 Summer Avenue. Paul Bergrin remained detained from the 20th of May 2009, to date.

Upon Yolanda Jauregui's release and subsequent to Alejandro's arrest, Abdul Williams surrendered to federal authorities and was incarcerated at the Hudson Cty Jail in Kearney, NJ with Alejandro, his brother Lorenzo and Yolanda's father. Yolanda visited Alejandro at the facility. The transaction was arranged on the telephone according to Yolanda. It had to be between the time frame of May 2009 to November 2009, when Yolanda was rearrested after she sold a kilo of cocaine to Maria Corriera.

The defense specifically asked for the recording of the transaction but it was never provided. Yolanda Jauregui informed the FBI that the transaction occurred and never equivocated. She described it in methodical detail of the arrangements and how Abdul Williams's cousin met with her and Castro's brother Pelon and the 7 kilos were placed in the trunk of the cousin's car. There is no way anyone could have copiously described the event without it occurring.

The defense never received the recording and Bergrin pleaded with his investigator to get it. Their position was that Abdul Williams used other peoples PIN numbers to make calls and made hundreds of calls from the jail during this time frame and they did not have the time to review. Williams denied the transaction to the government, denied that he ever gave Yolanda money when they met when she was out on bail and before he surrendered, and denied an intimate relationship with her. Bergrin found out from Yolanda Jauregui's daughter Ashley that Yolanda was sexually involved with Abdul Williams also.

What is of most importance is that Yolanda vehemently denied ever engaging in drug transactions with Paul Bergrin and that Abdul Williams worked for them as a courier and delivered drugs for Bergrin or her to customers and was paid a fee based upon that as Williams claimed. That is why they never called her as she would have disputed the testimony of Abdul Williams, Rondre Kelly, and Eugene Braswell. If Paul Bergrin had called her as a defense witness, she would have invoked the Fifth Amendment.

Paul Bergrin begged on multiple occasions to voluntarily take a polygraph or to have their witnesses be given one and the government refused.

You are going to see a nauseating pattern in this case if you have not already. The cooperating witness who knows that Bergrin is innocent, that the government presented false and perjured testimony, and was told by Yolanda that both Bergrin had no drug dealings with Castro and her, and that Bergrin was aware Oscar was an informant is Maria Corriera.

Maria Corriera sent SA Shawn Brokos an email stating that Paul Bergrin knew that Oscar was an informant. However, because Maria Corriera embezzled $22K of FBI funds, solicited Albert Castro to falsely testify against Bergrin in the first trial, and had open bank credit card and other fraud cases, she would have also invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Paul Bergrin was shit out of luck. The government kept all the cases open of potential witnesses who

would have exculpated him so he could not use them as defense witnesses. Even witnesses whom they knew would never be called such as Alejandro Castro, Alonzo Castro, Jose Jimenez, Yolanda Jauregui, Ramon Jimenez (Yolanda's brother), and all of the people that were allegedly at the Anthony Young / Paul Bergrin street meeting whom they never charged, and so many others like Corriera.

In short, the government AUSAs are definitely aware that they presented a false case to the jury and Judge Cavanaugh. Does that matter? It certainly should and it would, if the goal of this prosecution ever involved truth and justuce. 

Above the Law: Abdul Williams

How can the government permit someone like Abdul Williams who has 15 violent and major felony convictions, is a prime suspect in two murders, dealt 7500 bags of heroin a day in Bradley Court in Newark for years, ran that location with violence and next to a school, and polluted our system with 1000's of kilograms of heroin and 1.5 kilograms of cocaine per week, which in one year amounts to 70 kilograms, and was involved in at least 4 admitted shootings be given any benefit for his fabricated testimony?

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. 

The Vicente Esteves Tale

One thing that a good fiction writer learns early is that fiction should at least be somewhat believable. There should be some connection to reality or a factual basis in the story. Any decent fiction writer will understand that concept, but most lousy fiction writers are clueless on the necessity of using facts in a story. Vicente Esteves tells a tale so absurd that even Hollywood producers would laugh.

The only fact included in the Esteves story is that he contacted Paul Bergrin while in jail and seeking an attorney. The rest of it is like a bad B-movie script. A Google search on the topic yields many similarly written flicks, like Werewolves on Wheels and The Brain Eaters. Really - the Vicente Esteves story is no more believable than either of those B-movies. Some people enjoy these sort of flicks, so they exist; however, certainly have no place in a court of law.

Vicente Esteves and Oscar Cordova went to the same B-movie production school. Their tales interconnect at some points and it is clear that the two shared notes in class.

We discovered that Oscar Cordova lied in testimony earlier in the week. He made the claim on the stand in Bergrin's trial that he only contacted the DEA because though he was a drug trafficker and a gang member, he didn't participate in murder and Paul wanted to murder witnesses. Bergrin's cross-examination revealed that Oscar the informant had never met or spoke with him prior to his meetings with DEA agents and attempts at taping. Caught in his own web of lies - or were they his lies?

Realistically, almost everything that came out of Oscar the informant's mouth was a lie, but Paul Begrin really nailed him on that one. I am left to wonder if Lord Gino (Gustavo Colon) is actually his father. Is Oscar just the usual dirtbag informant or is daddy really the almighty crown of the Chicago Latin Kings? I vote for dirtbag informant, but if I'm incorrect, there's no doubt that daddy disowned him long ago.

I admit to little knowledge on gangs and wish that an expert on the Latin Kings would weigh-in on the topic. Paul Bergrin should have such an expert on the defense witness list.

Script and storyline concocted by agents or witnesses?

There cannot possible be DEA and FBI agents out there that are so stupid that any would buy the crap their witnesses are testifying to in this trial. I, believe it or not, still have some level of respect for the system, though it's been slim for years and is getting slimmer by the minute. To think that these agents are the level of stupid required to buy all of this hogwash would just floor me. Please tell me it ain't so....

The problem is that if these agents are not so stupid as to buy this crap hook, line, and sinker, they certainly helped to concoct it and created this storyline. We the people lose either way, obviously. All of the agents (DEA and FBI) are paid great salaries. The people have become the suckers in this equation, no matter how you want to view it.

What does this say about the prosecution team?

Not much that's good, I'm afraid. Prosecutors are supposed to represent the people and make a serious effort to weed-out the lies told by the criminal informants that they present during the course of a trial. As a matter of fact, the prosecutor carries the ultimate responsibility to actually verify any main points asserted by these criminal witnesses prior to any trial testimony.

So what would a prosecutor do if he discovered that a government witness was lying on the stand or even in sworn depositions? What if a different prosecutor still insisted on the testimony being valid? Well, I can only tell you what happened in my own trial:

John Craft (now an AUSA) was not the only prosecutor in my trial. Craft also had the assistance of the main area prosecutor with the Office of the Statewide Prosecutor, John Roman. Roman would not call my co-defendant (Robert Mihalek AKA Rocky) to the stand when he realized that his testimony in depositions was a bunch of lies. Roman ordered Rocky to leave the courthouse and he was never called to testify.

A prosecutor that truly represented the people would have called Rocky and allowed him to impeach himself and admit to all of the lies and name those that coerced and pushed him to state the lies to begin with. So I have no real admiration for John Roman, but I also do not despise him as I do John Craft. Do you see the difference here? 

Roman was not willing to go the extra step of participating in the scheme. On the other hand, he made no move to correct it either. Roman was mad when he figured out what was done, but not mad enough to correct it.

Edit 23 February 2013 @ 6:30pm EST:

That was the short version of the Roman and Craft story. I decided that if I am going to tell it at all, I should do so correctly:

Craft, Roman, and my co-defendant (Rocky) all entered a private room near the courtroom. Craft stated that they wanted to go over Rocky's testimony. Rocky stated that there was no need to because he knew the truth and fully intended to tell it on the stand. Roman got angry and stomped out of the room, slamming the door. Craft then ordered Rocky to leave the courthouse and wait in his car in the parking garage for further instructions. Rocky was left waiting in the car all day and then received a call from the main case agent (Brant Rose) ordering him to come to MBI offices immediately.

The above stated is what Rocky told me when I visited him at his Cape Canaveral condo the same day of my acquittal. Another state witness that was my friend (now deceased) stated the same, minus the actual conversations that took place in the private room, the same day. Suzanne Redfern really cared about Rocky and was concerned for him, so watching Roman stomp out of the room and then Craft yelling at Rocky as they both exited and Rocky heading for the elevator was noteworthy to her.

Did Roman stomp out of the room because Rocky stated that he would be testifying truthfully or because it was a surprise to him that Rocky had ever lied in his depositions? We will never know. Roman was not involved in any part of the case and was only at the trial to assist Craft, as far as I am aware.


Back to Paul Bergrin's prosecutors

The prosecution team in Paul Bergrin's trial is complicit in presenting the false testimony of Oscar Cordova and Vicente Esteves. I have no choice except to conclude that not one of them has any conscience at all and each is truly the evil that they claim to fight. For the record, those names are:

Steven Sanders (AUSA)

Joseph Minish (AUSA)

John Gay (AUSA)

Paul Fishman (US Attorney)

So while I did take notice that Paul Bergrin excused the agents and the prosecution team in his questioning of witnesses this past week for their clear complicity in the false testimony, I do not excuse any one of them. Even if, and that is a big IF, the witnesses each concocted these lies they're telling on the stand all by themselves, prosecutors have a responsibility to the people.

The prosecutor is an important part of the justice system and to truly represent the interests of the people, is ultimately responsible for the presentation of falsities in witness testimony. A prosecutor is the last stop between what the witnesses tell the agents and the agents claim to have verified - he presents the testimony as truthful to the jury.

No one could convince me that any person named on the included list above is so stupid as to actually believe, let alone have verified, most of the testimony by this parade of criminal informants receiving get out of jail free cards in exchange for false statements to a jury in trial.

There is no excuse available to agents and certainly not to prosecutors. They are all complicit.

Article referenced:

Bergrin devised plan to kill witnesses, former client testifies


UPDATE on 17 August @545am:

Yes, this is the John Craft that prosecuted me:

John Craft Investigated for Racist Remarks

 

 

UPDATED ON 14 OCTOBER 2021 - For whatever reason, I misspelled Vicente Esteves throughout this post. It is now corrected. I believe that it was misspelled in the now disappeared news article and in court documents.