by TChris

A federal jury in Manhattan today found C. Gregory Earls, former CEO of U.S. Technologies, Inc, guilty of securities fraud, mail fraud (x2) and wire fraud (x19). Prosecutors argued that Earls cheated investors out of more than $13 million.

Former FBI Director William Webster headed the committee that audited U.S. Technologies' investments. Webster had agreed to chair a new national board that is supposed to police corporate accountants, but he resigned as a result of the charges against Earls.

by TChris

This poor guy really needed a drink.

Ronald Langdale, 58, of Los Angeles ... allegedly robbed the Bank of America near Beach Boulevard and Ellis Avenue about 5:15 p.m. Wednesday, ordering a teller to hand over money. He told her he had a weapon, police said, but none was seen. After the teller complied, police said, the robber left with an undisclosed amount and walked [across the mall parking lot] to [Mario's Restaurant], took a seat at the bar and ordered a beer.

Langlade started counting "a wad of money" while he sipped his beer. A few minutes later, police entered the bar looking for witnesses to the robbery, and noticed that Langdale matched the description of the robber that tellers had provided.

by TChris

Perry Mason was fortunate to have an investigator who repeatedly found the evidence that Mason needed to prove his client's innocence -- usually just in the nick of time, as Mason was cross-examining the true culprit. The real world is less dramatic -- most of the time.

Defense attorneys in Scott Peterson's murder trial will investigate claims made in an anonymous letter saying that someone else may have killed Peterson's pregnant wife.

Judge Alfred A. Delucchi sealed the letter so its contents are unknown. How long it will take the defense to investigate the information contained in the letter is also unknown, but Peterson's jury selection is in progress, and opening statements are scheduled for May 17. Will the true killer be found, Perry Mason style, in the midst of trial? Stay tuned.

Bump and Update: Michael Jackson's lawyers respond:

Mr. Jackson and his attorneys remind the public that an indictment is merely a formal “accusation.” We also remind the public that Michael Jackson, like any other person accused of a crime, is “presumed to be innocent.” Mr. Jackson and his attorneys are confident that after a trial on these charges, Mr. Jackson will be fully exonerated and that the allegations contained in the indictment will be shown to be patently false. In this case, Mr. Jackson is not just “presumed” to be innocent but is in fact innocent. Michael is looking forward to his day in court and wishes to thank the millions of fans throughout the world who continue to support him during this difficult period.

*************
Original Post: 4/21 8 pm

ABC News reports that Michael Jackson has been indicted by the grand jury. This is news? Who would have thought otherwise? A grand jury is a one sided proceeding where the defense does not get to appear, present evidence or cross-examine witnesses. Hence, the old saying, a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich.

The stamp of imprimateur by the grand jury makes the case no stronger today than it was last week. What it does mean is that Michael Jackson will not be allowed a preliminary hearing at which to cross-examine the cops and experts who would testify against him--no way would the prosecution have called the young accuser at the hearing anyway. By going to the grand jury, the Prosecution doesn't have to give the defense an early shot at their witnesses, and the ability to lock them into a version of events, which would allow the defense to impeach them at trial if their testimony at trial varied from that given at the prelim.

Two weeks ago we wrote about a strange episode in New York involving former Enron CEO and now federal defendant Jeffrey Skilling, who was taken by police to a hospital after exhibiting some paranoid behavior:

Former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling was taken to a hospital early Friday after several people called police saying he was pulling on their clothes and accusing them of being FBI agents, a police source told The Associated Press.

The Houston Chronicle now reports prosecutors have charged Skilling violated the terms of his bond in New York:

Federal prosecutors say ex-Enron CEO Jeff Skilling violated his $5 million bond in New York City earlier this month by being severely intoxicated, trying to lift a woman's blouse looking for an FBI wiretap and attempting to steal a car license plate, according to a document filed in court today. Prosecutors want U.S. District Judge Sim Lake to consider further restrictions on Skilling as he awaits trial -- but don't say whether they want Skilling jailed or whether they will ask that some or all of his bond be forfeited.

We don't think Skilling's bond or liberty are in jeopardy at this point. It's more likely the Judge will add some new conditions, like alcohol or mental health treatment.

Skilling's lawyers previously told reporters that Skilling and his wife were attacked by two men who knocked her down and rendered her unconscious. The government's report indicates Skilling started the disturbance and admitted at the hospital that he accidentally knocked down his wife himself.

Apparently, Skilling still has lots of bucks. Not only did he post a $5 million bond, but while in New York, he stayed at the Four Seasons where the standard room rate is between $575 and $750 a night.

by TChris

Given our society's thirst for vengeful punishment, you're never too old or infirm to go to prison.

A grandmother from Algonquin was sentenced this morning to 18 months in prison after admitting she wrote a $22,000 bad check for a luxury sport-utility vehicle to a McHenry County car dealer.

The prison term for Betty A. Gooch, 75, was part of a plea bargain with McHenry County prosecutors, who insisted she spend time behind bars for the deceptive practices conviction.

Gooch suffers from a number of medical problems. She appeared at her sentencing this morning in a wheelchair.

Prosecutors claim that prison was "the only way" to stop Gooch from committing more crimes. Really? Probation agents can't effectively supervise an elderly woman in a wheelchair?

by TChris

Former Louisiana Judge C. Hunter King lost his job after he threatened courthouse employees with the loss of their jobs if they didn't sell tickets to a campaign fund-raiser. When his court reporter complained to the Judiciary Commission, King denied the charges under oath, characterizing the court reporter as a disgruntled ex-employee. The lie fell apart when he was confronted with "recorded tapes of staff meetings during which he spoke frankly of campaign fund raising on court time." King, suddenly remorseful, asked the State Supreme Court to give him a second chance, but the court unanimously decided to remove him from his judgeship.

Now King is being prosecuted for perjury as a result of his false testimony before the Judicial Commission, but the details of that prosecution have become difficult to unearth. Judge Julian Parker, presiding in former Judge King's case, issued a gag order and took the unusual step of sealing the court file. Parker gave no explanation for the order, and the computerized court docket doesn't reflect a request by any party for an order sealing the file. Gag orders sometimes promote a fair trial, but court files are public records, and public scrutiny of the judicial system serves as a check against judicial abuses. Sealing court files is a rare practice in Orleans Parish, a practice that hasn't been followed in other high profile cases. Why is Judge Parker treating the case of former Judge King differently?

Writer Dave Cullen has the article to read today in Slate on the 5th anniversay of Columbine. He has a fascinating portrait of Klebold and Harris, and says, "At last we know why the Columbine killers did it." You can read more over at Dave's blog, Conclusive Evidence. Dave emailed us earlier he had been "talking to the fbi well into the night."

[comments now closed]

by TChris

The latest accusation against Michael Jackson stems from a notoriously unreliable source: a "repressed" memory that the accuser "recovered" in therapy.

"In my opinion, one has to be incredibly suspect of recovered memory," Beverly Hills psychiatrist Dr. Howard Shapiro told Reuters. "The younger the subject was (when the incident occurred), the less they're able to make sense of the experience, and when they remember it later they may put an interpretation on it," he said.

Some "recovered" memories are imagined, some are induced or encouraged by the therapist. If that's all there is to the latest accusation against Jackson, it doesn't merit prosecution.

by TChris

William Bennette joined the Secret Service in 1999 after retiring from the New York Police Department. He received a commendation for rescue work on Sept. 11, 2001. But Bennette falsely claimed that five Secret Services vehicles were destroyed on 9/11, when he actually gave three of the cars to his wife and daughter after forging signatures of agency managers to transfer the titles. The other two cars were found at an auto repair shop in Queens.

Bennette entered not guilty pleas yesterday to charges of theft of government property. Bennette's lawyer, "rather than proclaiming his client's innocence, indicated that psychological effects from 9/11 might have caused his behavior."

by TChris

It is all too rare for an appellate court to overturn a conviction on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Appellate judges normally defer to a jury's assessment of the evidence, even when the evidence is so skinny that reasonable minds would doubt the defendant's guilt.

Nonetheless, the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit reversed the money laundering conviction of realtor Michael Carucci, who was accused of helping Stephen Flemmi hide profits from criminal enterprises by buying a condo and equipment for a laundromat. There wasn't much doubt that Carucci helped Flemmi buy the property (as a realtor, that was his job) but the court considered the evidence "too thin" to prove that the money used to purchase the property came from gambling, extortion, or drug trafficking.

"The court of appeals decided today that it wasn't enough for the government to prove that a businessman had the misfortune of having a criminal as his client," said Martin Weinberg, Carucci's lawyer.

Carucci had been convicted of four additional money laundry counts that the district judge overturned. He was acquitted of 94 other counts. The court of appeals' ruling gives Carucci a complete victory, so he will serve no part of the ten month sentence that had been imposed.

by TChris

As TalkLeft reported in March, Scott Peterson's lawyer received a tip that a potential juror in Peterson's trial was pretending to be open-minded while telling others outside the courtroom that she thought Peterson was "guilty as hell" and that she would lie to get on the jury so that Peterson would "get what was due to him."

"She said that she was trying as hard as she could to pass the test and not appear biased," said the tipster, whose name was redacted from [a signed declaration in] the court file. "She also said she would try to become 'in charge,' which I interpreted as being the foreperson of the jury."

The tipster also said the woman had spoken of Peterson's attorney [Mark Geragos], who is also representing Michael Jackson in his child-molestation case, saying, "Anyone who defends a wife-killer and a child molester deserves to lose."

Ouch! Not only does she think Peterson is guilty despite hearing not a word of testimony, she thinks Peterson deserves to lose because her lawyer defends other presumptively innocent clients.

Although the woman denied making the statements, prosecutors conducted an investigation and ultimately agreed that she should not be allowed to serve as a juror. The judge dismissed the woman on Tuesday. Geragos has suggested that prosecutors should consider charging the woman with perjury, but "San Mateo District Attorney Jim Fox said Tuesday his office was not pursuing the case and noted that during his 21-year tenure, a juror had never faced perjury charges." So committing perjury for the purpose of assisting the state in securing convictions isn't a crime worth pursuing?