In my earlier posts (with more to follow), I began to show how Bear Stearns, using various bankruptcy insiders and a local bankruptcy court, had installed a self-proclaimed Israeli "assassin" cum secret agent, Juval Aviv (who had been previously indicted and prosecuted by the US Government), to "supervise" the local US Attorney's Office in extensive illegal, secret wiretapping of myself, my attorneys, my friends, my family and reporters I communicated with.
In 2006, I obtained the confession by Paul S. Singerman, of Berger Singerman, that protected law enforcement materials, including the results of the wiretapping, were then secretly funneled to Bear Stearns for their own private use. Bear Stearns was involved in extensive civil litigation in Florida state and federal courts with myself and my family. Anthony Pelicano — the infamous Hollywood P.I. who, similarly, was conducting wiretapping to get information for civil court cases — received 15 years in federal prison for these very actions.
The communications surveillance occurred throughout pending appeals in federal court and ongoing proceedings in Florida state court. It was done without notice — either before, during and after the (still ongoing?) surveillance — to myself, my attorneys, all reviewing courts, and the many other victims. This was completely hidden until late 2004, when the district court ordered the bankruptcy court to disgorge its extensive sealed and off-the-docket court record. Some of that record still remains concealed, despite the order.
To pay Berger Singerman and the extensive crew of secret "officers of the court" (complete with a "black bag" crew) — who were ostensibly retained by trustee Alan Goldberg — a scheme was orchestrated: Bear Stearns would pay the millions in fees, using a phantom "loan." In that way, Bear Stearns superficially protected itself and its agents from investigations into illegal activities, under the rubric of being "officers of the court."
The phantom "loan" funds never passed through any bankruptcy estate accounts or were reflected on any estate financial statements.
Since Bear Stearns paid the secret officers of the court directly, there were no traces in the bankruptcy court record (sealed or public) of their fee payment applications or fee approval orders. Also, the US Trustee was never served with any retention documents for the secret hirees and the key billing records of secret hirees still remain hidden, including those of Juval Aviv and P.I. William Riley.
Even the disclosed billing statements for the "public" hirees, e.g., Berger Singerman attorneys and attorney Michael Budwick, contain no reference to what took place during the secret hearings, or in England. Those statements never disclosed that fees were billed for illegally passing law enforcement tapes and other protected law enforcement materials to Bear Stearns senior managing directors, Mark Lehman and Daniel Taub.
Two of the key documents evidencing this scheme are: 1) the unsigned accounting statement for the bankruptcy estate filed yearly, and 2) the sham "loan" agreement:
This is one of the sham "Independent Estate Property Record and Report" accounting statements that was filed yearly:
Sham bankruptcy estate balance sheet filed by Paul Singerman of Berger Singerman for Alan Goldberg in October 2009.
Never, during a long career as an financial analyst on wall street, have I seen a filing more fraudulent than the above filing. Some reasons for this conclusion are:
— There is no signature or other identification of who actually prepared the accounting report. The only accountant the estate had, was employed for only a few days, early in the bankruptcy case. The accounting firm then immediately left the case ... without issuing any reports. No explanation was given for its removal.
— There is no entry for any part of the sham "loan" purportedly made by Bear Stearns to the estate to pay fees and expenses ... which totaled about $5 million dollars. The statement is a clear admission that no debt was ever owed to Bear Stearns — showing the "loan" agreement was a sham.
— The estate is valued at $20 million dollars. However, it provides no explanation how that value was arrived at. This is a fraudulent valuation since the estate had no asset value for several reasons:
First, Federal District Judge Lawrence King, during earlier litigation with Bear Stearns, ruled in 1996 that the trust had to be directly sued under Federal and Florida law. After that order was issued, Bear Stearns impleaded the trust as a defendant in 1997. So, Florida law was already being applied to the trust and that law required the trust be sued directly. Judge Herbert Stettin (the trustee of the Scott Rothstein bankruptcy estate) represented the trust in federal court.
Because the bankruptcy trustee, Alan Goldberg, refused to sue the trust, the estate's only asset was a worthless claim.
What had occurred in the bankruptcy was that a single line "finding" of estate property was inserted at the end of a discovery sanction order (written entirely by Berger Singerman) that was issued in a bankruptcy discharge objection proceeding held under 11 U.S.C. § 727. Liability in a discharge objection proceeding is legally impossible because the only matter at stake in such proceeding is the denial of a bankruptcy discharge.
In addition, during the secret bankruptcy hearings, Berger Singerman disclosed that Goldberg was suing, in England, the same trustees who were already represented by Judge Stettin in federal court before Judge King. This confirmed that the only estate "asset" was a claim of indeterminate value in England since Goldberg refused to sue in the U.S.
The hidden bankruptcy court transcripts further disclosed that Goldberg was seeking a Mareva Injuction in the England litigation. An English Mareva Injunction is a pre-judgment injunction issued while a claim is litigated. A few months earlier, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Grupo Mexicano de Desarrollo, SA v. Alliance Bond Fund, Inc., 527 US 308 (1999), had ruled that Mareva Injunctions (pre-judgment injunctions) were not permitted in U.S. Courts. Berger Singerman, thereby, secretly admitted that all they had was a claim and not a judgment against either myself or the trust.
Goldberg lost his ligation in England, so the value of his "asset" ... was zero. This confirmed that I was in prison to pay a judgment debt that never existed; and that Berger Singerman withheld critical information from myself, my attorneys, and reviewing courts throughout my appeals.
This is the phantom loan agreement between Goldberg and Bear Stearns, dated mid June 1998:
the still-used sham 1998 Bear Stearns-Goldberg finance agreement
One reason the $5 million in payments made by Bear Stearns were not listed on the bankruptcy estate accounting report is that even such a debt could give rise to criminal charges as fraudulent fee claims against the bankruptcy estate, for the theft of law enforcement materials.
Moreover, since none of the secret officers of the court submitted bills for approval, no orders for submitted bills were issued, and no service was made on the U.S. Trustee's Office (required by law to review all bills), the Bear Stearns fee payments were not an estate debt.
Also, even though the loan agreement claims it was reached in mid June, Bear Stearns had already secretly funneled funds to Goldberg's ostensible professionals before that date. See this post.
The "professionals," who received fee payments from Bear Stearns, fall into two categories. First were Goldberg's publicly disclosed professionals, e.g., Berger Singerman attorneys, attorney Michael Budwick.
Mr. Budwick, co-counsel with Berger Singerman, has stated in court filings that he never knew of the secret hearings or the communications surveillance.
The second group were those "professionals," who were ostensibly hired by Goldberg under "seal." This second group included Juval Aviv, P.I. William Riley, Coudert Brothers, and others.
The latter (secretly hired) group all had backdated (nunc pro tunc) individual "sealed" applications filed, and at the related "retention" hearings still undisclosed "results" were reported without the presence of a court reporter.
None of these sealed retentions were lawful because: none of the applications were served on the U.S. Trustee's Office, so they could not be reviewed, as required by law; none of the secret hirees filed their bills, even under seal, (the single exception being Coudert Brothers, which filed bills years later — but Coudert didn't seek approval for payments to it by Bear Stearns and its bills listed Bear Stearns as its client); none of the secret hirees sought or received approval for bill payments. These missing prerequisites to legitimacy invalidated employment by Goldberg and instead the group was employed by Bear Stearns, which paid them.
The "public" group never submitted or released bills that described their actions taken "under seal," even after the record was unsealed.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
A Letter to The Editor - South Florida Business Journal To Correct Errors
This post is a copy of a letter to the editor at the South Florida Business Journal to correct some errors in a story originally published on my case. It is self-explanatory and corrects substantial factual errors that keep showing up in reports.
Editor,
South Florida Business Journal
Sir:
In searching your website I found several articles on my case that, unfortunately, continue to pop up during Google searches, which is the reason for this letter.
The key article you published was in December 2007 titled: “20-year fight over millions in offshore money isn't over yet”
Because I believe there are serious inaccuracies in the article I would like to have published the following response as either a response to the article or a comment to the article:
“I am the principal, Stephan J. Lawrence, of the article you published titled: “20-year fight over millions in offshore money isn't over yet”.
I am writing this comment in response to its significant inaccuracies and omissions. Unfortunately, I did not have an opportunity to speak with the author before its publication and have no doubt misinformation was provided to the author, which I seek to correct, as stated below.
First, for the full history of this bizarre case of the longest civil contempt sanction in US federal court history please visit my blog. It significantly differs in scope and tenor than that presented in the article. For a condensed history follow this link to my Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed with the United States Supreme Court.
Here are a few brief responses to some of the factual errors or omissions in the article.
— The 1993 and 1995 litigation details with Bear Stearns, omits the key ruling that Federal District Judge Lawrence King made in his 1996 order: that Bear Stearns could not sue me as a proxy for the trust, since the trust had to be directly sued under Florida law. After that order, Bear Stearns impleaded the trust as a defendant in 1997. So, Florida law was already being applied to the trust ... and that law required the trust be sued directly.
— The trust was represented by Judge Herbert Stettin (the current trustee of the Scott Rothstein bankruptcy estate) before Judge King.
— Goldberg's position was similar to that of Bear Stearns. His two choices were: he could take over Bear Stearns' lawsuit or sue under a similar type bankruptcy avoidance provision. Goldberg did neither. Nowhere in the article is there mention of a judgment ever being entered for liability by either myself or the trust for the trust settlement. Goldberg had declined to sue for liability or to intervene. No such judgment ever existed.
— The article does not explain how the 'liability' element — the required precursor to execution (turn over) — was arrived at. In short, what occurred was a single line was inserted into a discovery sanction order that was issued in a bankruptcy discharge objection proceeding under 11 U.S.C. § 727. Liability in a discharge objection proceeding is legally impossible because the only matter at stake in such proceeding is the denial of a bankruptcy discharge. In addition, there is no basis to appeal such a line on the theory that liability had been assigned since liability was never at stake. Indeed, to even attempt to raise such hypothetical future liability in a discharge appeal could be met with sanctions. A basic tenet of bankruptcy is that liability for pre-bankruptcy transfers can only come from actions under both 11 U.S.C. § 550 (to establish who is liable) and under the 'avoidance provisions' of the bankruptcy code (to establish amounts liable for). Both must occur.
— There was no $20 million margin deficit with Bear Stearns. The margin call given was substantially less and was also vastly inflated. The final arbitration award was for about $16 million plus interest. There is no relationship between a margin call amount and any ultimate debt; most margin calls result in no debt owed after liquidation.
— The trades Bear Stearns was given credit for, by the NASD arbitration panel, never existed and were backdated. No explanation was given how an award for non-existent trades, using what has come to be called 'flash prices,' could occur ... since it couldn't. The SEC did nothing to prevent this and a fruitful investigation by a single FBI agent, who took and interest, was quickly shut down. The Options Clearing Corp (OCC) and The Chicago Board Options Exchange (CBOE), after much litigation, both later admitted the trades never occurred. The OCC/CBOE admissions are posted here.
— Florida was not my “new home state.” I became a Florida resident in the early 1980's, long before the 1987 crash. Florida's on line database shows that my main company, Pompano-Windy Partners, Ltd, had myself as its agent along with my home address almost two years before the 1987 crash. I was a Florida resident for years before that date.
— The statement that Goldberg hired Juval Aviv simply to "track down offshore activities" completely omits the incredible scope of what really occurred, all in secret and away from sight of myself, my attorneys, all reviewing courts, and the public. The unsealed documents and transcripts paint a far different picture. See my 2006 Wiretap and Civil Rights Complaint here. It is simply impossible, in this short response, to describe those events, however, my blog will do so. See also Certiorari Petition.
— I have posted excerpts from some of the astounding transcripts of the few secret hearings at which a court reporter was present.
— The bankruptcy record is devoid, except for a single "application" filed secretly in January 2000, of any trace of Aviv's billings statements, applications for payments, orders approving actual payments, or records of payments by Goldberg to Aviv. These are the minimum prerequisites for Aviv having actually been working for Goldberg. Indeed, even the secret"application" for employment by Goldberg was never served on the U.S. Trustee's Office.
— Your description of my wiretap and civil rights complaint omits the key claims, made under Title 3 (the "Wiretap Act"), for illegal and extensive wiretapping done by Bear Stearns through the theft of law enforcement tapes illegally obtained by Goldberg. The article has no mention of the phone surveillance (fully documented in the sealed record and transcripts), how it was done, or that it forms the foundation of my complaint.
Lastly, it is unfortunate my former attorney, Robert A. Stok, was interviewed without my having a chance to respond. The 1997 discovery sanction order — the single line in which was used to imprison me for over six years and assign an over $40 million dollar liability to me — was appealed by Mr. Stok at my direction. At the hearing resulting in the Order, all of my witnesses (including Judge Stettin) were ejected and I was forbidden to present evidence. Mr. Stok then defaulted my appeal; District Court Judge Donald Middlebrooks ruled the default was "at worst, bad faith ... or at the very least, negligence or indifference." After Mr. Stok defaulted my appeal, Goldberg's attorney, Berger Singerman, prepared a subordination agreement between Mr. Stok's law firm and Bear Stearns, in which Bear Stearns subordinated their prior lien on my homestead in favor of Stok's law firm for no identifiable consideration and Stok's law firm immediately attempted to foreclose on my homestead … using the subordination agreement. There were other serious matters of dispute between myself and Mr. Stok that are beyond the scope of this limited comment.”
Friday, April 8, 2011
A Tale Of Two Pedophiles — A New Explanation For Jeffrey Epstein's Sweetheart Treatment
A comparison of Jeffrey Epstein's case, and another case, U.S. v. Kent Frank 599 F.3d 1221 (11th Cir. 2010), shows that Roy Black's statement, that Epstein was only facing a 'low-ball' number of 10 years in federal prison, was not accurate. If the Government had pursued Epstein, with the same zeal it pursued Frank, Epstein was facing at least the same 40 years Frank received. In addition, if consecutive sentences were applied, that number increased dramatically. In the Frank case, to reach the 40 years, the 11th Circuit applied a definition to "purchase," under 18 U.S.C. §2251, that included the solicitation of underage girls — the same claims made against Epstein.
I met Mr. Frank at the FDC Miami. And along with 100's of other cases I was requested to look at, I briefly looked at his case. The case against Frank was far weaker than that reported in the press against Jeffrey Epstein.
The Frank case involved an American who traveled to Cambodia as a "sex tourist." Frank was arrested and charged in Cambodia. The age of consent in Cambodia has been reported as being either 15 or 16. Frank was found innocent in Cambodia and released. He was later arrested in Vietnam and extradited to the U.S. on the Cambodian charges. Rights groups have disputed the willingness of Cambodian courts to convict in such cases.
In the U.S. Frank trial, none of the four victims appeared as witnesses. The evidence against Frank was a statement given by Frank in Cambodia in which he admitted he met the girls at bars, paid the girls for sex and to photograph them, and had seen them on multiple occasions. A large number of pornographic photos of the girls, sexual paraphernalia, and DVDs found in his possession were also used as evidence.
Unlike Jeffrey Epstein's case, the ages of the four girls were in dispute. Because Cambodia does not maintain birth records, and without witnesses, the victims ages were determined at trial through the use of expert witnesses viewing the photos taken by Frank. While the 11th Circuit does not specifically mention the theory the experts used to determine age, from what I remember from my brief exposure to the case was that the 'Tanner scale' was used, a measure used in such cases. As Wikipedia describes: "The Tanner scale (also known as the Tanner stages) is a scale of physical development in children, adolescents and adults. The scale defines physical measurements of development based on external primary and secondary sex characteristics."
One criticism of the Tanner scale is that the scale is unreliable for residents of third world countries because poor nutrition delays development. The Tanner scale is not 100% reliable and has been successfully disputed. Wikipedia links to one dramatic case where the alleged victim appeared, as reported in Radaronline: Adult Film Star Verifies Her Age, Saves Fan From 20 Years In Prison! (“Lupe walked into the courtroom and it was like a courtroom drama movie,” Assistant Public Defender Hector L. Ramos-Vega said.) The prosecution, in the Carlos Simon-Timmerman case above, proceeded based solely on possession of a purchased pornographic DVD. Obviously, while the Frank case was much stronger than that against Carlos Simon-Timmerman, it was far weaker than the reported case against Epstein, which was proceeding at about the same time. In Epstein's case there where 30-40 potential victims identified whose ages could be confirmed. Indeed, the Carlos Simon-Timmerman case alone — based on a single DVD — makes it clear Jeffrey Epstein received special treatment.
My interest in the Jeffrey Epstein case arose because I don't believe in the type of coincidences I saw:
As I previously posted, the accused chief intimidator of the underage Epstein victims, as identified by the Palm Beach Police Department, was a P.I. named William Riley. It turned out that Riley was also an officer of the local bankruptcy court, who was illegally appointed at a secret off-the-docket hearing that was concealed for many years. In addition, he and a host of other, still not fully identified characters, were afforded a strange and illegal status as a type of federal law enforcement official that permitted them access to protected law enforcement materials. Those materials, which included protected law enforcement tapes (protected under the "Wiretap Act" (Title 3)) were then illegally passed on to Bear Stearns senior managing directors.
A common denominator with Epstein, is the Bear Stearns Companies, Inc. The Bear Stearns Cayman Island Hedge Fund managers were being brought to trial at the time of the sweetheart deal with Jeffrey Epstein. There was no dispute about the critical information in Epstein's possession concerning the Bear Stearns hedge fund trial, particularly since key records were hidden in the Cayman Islands. Epstein's lawyers touted his importance to the Government's case against Bear Stearns as the reason for his special treatment. That treatment included almost daily — and hotly criticized — "furloughs" to his attorneys offices to "help" in the Bear Stearns prosecution. Bear Stearns had enormous incentive to shield Epstein from the threat of a long sentence.
Compare Epstein's case to that of Raj Rajaratnam, the now proceeding Wall Street insider trading case. In the Rajaratnam case, the government obtained pleas from numerous insider witnesses, who were facing long prison sentences, and thereby turned them into damning witnesses against Rajaratnam, as reported in the NY Times. In the Bear Stearns hedge fund trial, the main evidence was email — no insider witnesses were used. Yet, without sweetheart treatment, many witnesses could have been obtained — starting with Jeffrey Epstein and finishing with the senior managing directors of Bear Stearns who had orchestrated the theft of protected law enforcement tapes and other materials.
Bear Stearns was far more effective than Epstein in demonstrating its ability to receive sweetheart treatment — treatment that would also extend to Jeffrey Epstein. Incredibly, Bear Stearns had succeeded in placing Juval Aviv, a discredited self proclaimed Israeli assassin who had been prosecuted by the Government, in control of the local United States Attorney's Office to direct illegal communications surveillance (see earlier posts). Thereby, a flood of protected law enforcement material began secretly flowing to Bear Stearns senior managing directors. The fact that the identity of Bear Stearns, as the ultimate recipient of the materials was carefully concealed, did not excuse what occurred. In late 2004, after I obtained access to the sealed record, I informed the USAO of what I had learned. In 2006, I secured a confession to the crimes.
A key player is Florida local bankruptcy power broker Paul Singerman — himself "Teflon coated" in brushing off his involvement in and ownership of Gibraltar Private Bank & Trust, a Florida private bank found to be violating money laundering laws. Gibraltar was a key player in convicted Ponzi schemer Scott Rothstein's money laundering scheme.
In 2006, I laid out the clear evidence showing how the protected law enforcement materials were being stolen and passed to Bear Stearns. In response, Paul Singerman confessed to passing the law enforcement tapes and other materials to Bear Stearns. Indeed, in April 2006, he brazenly flaunted his activities by stating in a court filing: "according to Lawrence, one of the purposes of Title Ill is to prevent unlawful communications intercepts being used for "private financial gain." ... sharing the contents of the discovery obtained by court order with Lawrence's largest creditor— Bear Stearns & Co.— ... was entirely appropriate so that they could determine what, if anything, in the discovery obtained might be useful to them." See p3 here
I met Mr. Frank at the FDC Miami. And along with 100's of other cases I was requested to look at, I briefly looked at his case. The case against Frank was far weaker than that reported in the press against Jeffrey Epstein.
The Frank case involved an American who traveled to Cambodia as a "sex tourist." Frank was arrested and charged in Cambodia. The age of consent in Cambodia has been reported as being either 15 or 16. Frank was found innocent in Cambodia and released. He was later arrested in Vietnam and extradited to the U.S. on the Cambodian charges. Rights groups have disputed the willingness of Cambodian courts to convict in such cases.
In the U.S. Frank trial, none of the four victims appeared as witnesses. The evidence against Frank was a statement given by Frank in Cambodia in which he admitted he met the girls at bars, paid the girls for sex and to photograph them, and had seen them on multiple occasions. A large number of pornographic photos of the girls, sexual paraphernalia, and DVDs found in his possession were also used as evidence.
Unlike Jeffrey Epstein's case, the ages of the four girls were in dispute. Because Cambodia does not maintain birth records, and without witnesses, the victims ages were determined at trial through the use of expert witnesses viewing the photos taken by Frank. While the 11th Circuit does not specifically mention the theory the experts used to determine age, from what I remember from my brief exposure to the case was that the 'Tanner scale' was used, a measure used in such cases. As Wikipedia describes: "The Tanner scale (also known as the Tanner stages) is a scale of physical development in children, adolescents and adults. The scale defines physical measurements of development based on external primary and secondary sex characteristics."
One criticism of the Tanner scale is that the scale is unreliable for residents of third world countries because poor nutrition delays development. The Tanner scale is not 100% reliable and has been successfully disputed. Wikipedia links to one dramatic case where the alleged victim appeared, as reported in Radaronline: Adult Film Star Verifies Her Age, Saves Fan From 20 Years In Prison! (“Lupe walked into the courtroom and it was like a courtroom drama movie,” Assistant Public Defender Hector L. Ramos-Vega said.) The prosecution, in the Carlos Simon-Timmerman case above, proceeded based solely on possession of a purchased pornographic DVD. Obviously, while the Frank case was much stronger than that against Carlos Simon-Timmerman, it was far weaker than the reported case against Epstein, which was proceeding at about the same time. In Epstein's case there where 30-40 potential victims identified whose ages could be confirmed. Indeed, the Carlos Simon-Timmerman case alone — based on a single DVD — makes it clear Jeffrey Epstein received special treatment.
My interest in the Jeffrey Epstein case arose because I don't believe in the type of coincidences I saw:
As I previously posted, the accused chief intimidator of the underage Epstein victims, as identified by the Palm Beach Police Department, was a P.I. named William Riley. It turned out that Riley was also an officer of the local bankruptcy court, who was illegally appointed at a secret off-the-docket hearing that was concealed for many years. In addition, he and a host of other, still not fully identified characters, were afforded a strange and illegal status as a type of federal law enforcement official that permitted them access to protected law enforcement materials. Those materials, which included protected law enforcement tapes (protected under the "Wiretap Act" (Title 3)) were then illegally passed on to Bear Stearns senior managing directors.
A common denominator with Epstein, is the Bear Stearns Companies, Inc. The Bear Stearns Cayman Island Hedge Fund managers were being brought to trial at the time of the sweetheart deal with Jeffrey Epstein. There was no dispute about the critical information in Epstein's possession concerning the Bear Stearns hedge fund trial, particularly since key records were hidden in the Cayman Islands. Epstein's lawyers touted his importance to the Government's case against Bear Stearns as the reason for his special treatment. That treatment included almost daily — and hotly criticized — "furloughs" to his attorneys offices to "help" in the Bear Stearns prosecution. Bear Stearns had enormous incentive to shield Epstein from the threat of a long sentence.
Compare Epstein's case to that of Raj Rajaratnam, the now proceeding Wall Street insider trading case. In the Rajaratnam case, the government obtained pleas from numerous insider witnesses, who were facing long prison sentences, and thereby turned them into damning witnesses against Rajaratnam, as reported in the NY Times. In the Bear Stearns hedge fund trial, the main evidence was email — no insider witnesses were used. Yet, without sweetheart treatment, many witnesses could have been obtained — starting with Jeffrey Epstein and finishing with the senior managing directors of Bear Stearns who had orchestrated the theft of protected law enforcement tapes and other materials.
Bear Stearns was far more effective than Epstein in demonstrating its ability to receive sweetheart treatment — treatment that would also extend to Jeffrey Epstein. Incredibly, Bear Stearns had succeeded in placing Juval Aviv, a discredited self proclaimed Israeli assassin who had been prosecuted by the Government, in control of the local United States Attorney's Office to direct illegal communications surveillance (see earlier posts). Thereby, a flood of protected law enforcement material began secretly flowing to Bear Stearns senior managing directors. The fact that the identity of Bear Stearns, as the ultimate recipient of the materials was carefully concealed, did not excuse what occurred. In late 2004, after I obtained access to the sealed record, I informed the USAO of what I had learned. In 2006, I secured a confession to the crimes.
A key player is Florida local bankruptcy power broker Paul Singerman — himself "Teflon coated" in brushing off his involvement in and ownership of Gibraltar Private Bank & Trust, a Florida private bank found to be violating money laundering laws. Gibraltar was a key player in convicted Ponzi schemer Scott Rothstein's money laundering scheme.
In 2006, I laid out the clear evidence showing how the protected law enforcement materials were being stolen and passed to Bear Stearns. In response, Paul Singerman confessed to passing the law enforcement tapes and other materials to Bear Stearns. Indeed, in April 2006, he brazenly flaunted his activities by stating in a court filing: "according to Lawrence, one of the purposes of Title Ill is to prevent unlawful communications intercepts being used for "private financial gain." ... sharing the contents of the discovery obtained by court order with Lawrence's largest creditor— Bear Stearns & Co.— ... was entirely appropriate so that they could determine what, if anything, in the discovery obtained might be useful to them." See p3 here
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein's Accused Intimidator Was Also A G-Man; And About What Happened To The 'Pesky' FBI Agents
We all know that designated federal law enforcement agents — the FBI, US Attorneys, DOJ employees, etc. — are carefully trained (Quantico is world famous), vetted, identified and under constant scrutiny to uphold the highest standards. Don't we?
Not really ... there is a back door ... a back door so wide that federal law enforcement "badges" were, PEZ mint like , dispensed willy nilly, in secret, to unidentified federal indictees, con artists, and the like.
Any corrupt company or individual can use this back door ... as long as they have: a very fat wallet (a few spare million to begin); enormous insider clout (Bear Stearns of Cayman Islands CMO hedge fund scam/fame); and a very special and politically powerful "insider" man to make it all happen (Paul Singerman, of Berger Singerman P.A., of Gibraltar Private Bank & Trust money laundering fame).
My last post showed how accused chief Jeffrey Epstein intimidator, P.I. William Riley, had become a secret, protected "officer of the bankruptcy court." However, that was just the beginning. He also became a federal law enforcement agent.
In late 2005, over a year after the district court ordered the bankruptcy court to disgorge the secret bankruptcy record and after repeated denials, the court reporter "found" transcripts of four of the secret hearings held 5 years earlier.
The secret hearings and filings exposed a bizarre amalgam of wiretap and trial hearings. No bankruptcy court has ever been publicly known to conduct a wiretap hearing or issue communications surveillance orders. All communications surveillance is controlled by the Wiretap Act ("Title 3"), a criminal statute. The Government clearly and repeatedly stated this fact throughout the hearings. Through those hearings, P.I. Riley and others became "federal law enforcement agents."
In addition, the hearings were part of a secret trial in which unidentified "confidential agents" testified against me ... not in person, but through the mouths of Berger Singerman attorney James Fierberg (the sworn secret witness against me in the off-the-docket hearing described in my last post) and the self-proclaimed Israeli "hit-man," Juval Aviv ( who I never knew existed until years after he secretly testified against me). Mr. Aviv testified "over the phone," in this "anything goes" secret trial — without being sworn in. He testified, HUAC style, that he had in his hands my secret bank accounts! Every attempt I later made, to obtain the papers, that Mr. Aviv had so effectively waved "over the phone," was met with complete, stonewalled silence. Those obviously fictitious papers were never placed in the sealed record.
Some Background:
The wiretaps came about shortly after I was imprisoned at the FDC Miami for civil contempt. The basis for my long imprisonment has always been euphemistically based on "a finding of the bankruptcy court" — a carefully cultivated phrase designed to give the false impression that there was an actual judgment for liability for a completely lawful and disclosed 1991 trust settlement. In reality, the "finding" was a single sentence tacked to the end of a discovery sanction order in a bankruptcy discharge proceeding. It never could, under any known law, be considered a basis for liability to a bankruptcy trustee for a legal transfer made 7 years earlier (see US Supreme Court Petition for Writ of Certiorari). I never had even the remotest inkling or warning that I could suffer such liability from a discovery hearing in a discharge proceeding.
The "finding" order resulted from one of the most abusive hearings ever conducted in a U.S. courtroom (the complete details, with transcript, will be fully laid out in a further post). Unsurprisingly, the sanction order was entirely written by Paul Singerman, James Fierberg et.al.. At the discovery hearing, held on no notice, all of my witnesses were ejected from the hearing, including Judge Herbert Stettin (the trustee in the Scott Rothstein bankruptcy) who was the Trust's attorney in the long pending Bear Stearns federal lawsuit that began in 1993. I was completely prohibited from introducing any evidence or witnesses. Thereby, Berger Singerman's "factual findings" in the order were the opposite of actual evidence and, in critical instances, completely fabricated — including the totally bizarre "finding" that I had concealed the existence of the Trust.
In mid 1993, years before my bankruptcy case and only weeks after a Bear Stearns judgment first became final, Bear Stearns named the 1991 Lawrence Family Trust in Federal Court when it began execution on their judgment. In that lawsuit, critically, Federal District Court Judge Lawrence King ruled that under Federal and Florida law, the Trust must be sued to affect its assets. Bear Stearns then impleaded the Trust, which was represented by Judge Herbert Stettin. A simple examination of Judge King's order (including its very existence) explains why the source of the bankruptcy "finding" has been so carefully and continuously obscured ... the Trust was already in federal court and all Berger Singerman had to do was enter the case or sue — if they really had a case. The federal court case against the Trust was so weak that it was eventually closed for lack of prosecution.
THE ILLEGAL WIRETAPPING, NEW G-MEN, AND INFILTRATION OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE:
The roadblocks, to Berger Singerman (and Bear Stearns indirectly) obtaining the wiretaps and other protected law enforcement materials, were unsurmountable. Just one of those requirements was that access to the material was limited to law enforcement officers and certain Department of Justice employees. Alan Goldberg, the bankruptcy trustee, is a private trustee and is not considered a law enforcement officer or a part of the DOJ. The Government made that very point at the secret hearings.
Moreover, the Government repeatedly stated that: providing tapes of my recorded phone calls and law enforcement records to Goldberg violated multiple laws and regulations, including the Wiretap Act ("Title 3"), privacy laws and related regulations; that the phone tapes were recorded only for legitimate Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBOP) security concerns and were only accessible to designated law enforcement personnel; and that the bankruptcy court had no authority to issue rulings on communications surveillance matters:
"MR. DEAGUIAR (Attorney for FBOP): ... Your Honor, the Government feels that compliance with the Trustee's request would violate both the Privacy Act found at 18 USC 552 (a), I have copies of that statute as well if you would like, Title 5, and also Title 3 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 found at 18 USC Sections 2510 through 2522, and I have copies of pertinent sections with me as well." Page 7 here.
THOSE PESKY FBI AGENTS:
Mr. Fierberg bitterly and successfully complained that FBI agents had to screen the tapes: "I have been advised this morning that it is, unfortunately, the law enforcement officers themselves, the F.B.I. agents, or whoever, come in and sit down and go through the tapes" (Page 10 here) — Mr. Fierberg was clearly looking ahead. So the pipeline of tapes torrentially flowed directly to Berger Singerman, Juval Aviv, the other unidentified agents (which would include Jeffrey Epstein's P.I., William Riley) ... some of whom then funneled the contents to Bear Stearns senior managing directors Daniel Taub, Mark Lehman, and others.
The pesky FBI — who might ask embarrassing and serious questions about who was actually getting the tapes and how — had been surgically removed from the loop. The Government, without control, ended up conducting illegal wiretapping for Bear Stearns while they were involved in extensive Florida state and Federal court civil litigation against myself and my family.
Moreover, by removing trained law enforcement officers as screeners for the tapes, Mr. Fierberg, Juval Aviv, Paul Singerman, and unknown others collectively became the tape "translators" at the secret hearings. Nobody could verify if they were lying. During the hearings, Mr. Fierberg and Aviv freely, without question, insinuated "discoveries" in the tapes that, according to them, were essential in British and other foreign litigation. Of course, they always needed more (for "European litigation" of course) — even though my attorneys and myself were constantly discussing strategy over the phone for my contempt appeal then in the Eleventh Circuit (with oral argument coming up), my failed habeas corpus attempt (it was ruled I had no right to present a habeas claim!), and the extensive Florida State Court civil litigation with Bear Stearns and Berger Singerman. This was pure hoax. None of the tapes were ever filed or sealed — just one of the many ignored requirements of the Wiretap Act (Title 3). It is no wonder that Berger Singerman didn't want proper law enforcement officers screening the tapes — and questioning why the tapes were going to Berger Singerman, in a civil case ... who then funneled the tapes, their contents, and other protected law enforcement materials to Bear Stearns. Anthony Pelicano, the infamous Hollywood P.I. who was conducting wiretapping to get information for civil court cases, received 15 years in federal prison for these very actions.
Years later, after I finally learned of some of the foreign litigation (to be related about in a further post) I could not find a single direct or indirect reference to the tapes. When I raised the matter, Berger Singerman admitted the tapes were never used in British or other foreign litigation — confirming that Bear Stearns was always the intended recipient of the stolen tapes. To this day, I have been stonewalled in every attempt to obtain the British Court records (which would confirm the tapes were never used in Europe and much more), my own phone tapes, or a list of the protected information about me (and everyone I communicated with) that was funneled to Bear Stearns. All I ever saw, in limited foreign court documents I had independently obtained, was a perjured affidavit by Juval Aviv in which he, again, falsely swore he had identified my (fictitious) secret bank accounts.
Two or more off-the-docket wiretap hearings were held, and at least one order was issued between the November 16 and December 5 secret hearings. On December 4, 2000 Paul Singerman filed a sealed motion. It was not served on the Government.
The same day the motion was filed, an off-the-docket hearing was held without a court reporter, as stated in the resulting sealed order from that motion.
However, Berger Singerman had made a colossal blunder when they filed the motion. They had foolishly tacked on to the end of the motion the very phone logs they claimed to be seeking at the hearing held the next day!
The next day, December 5, at the transcribed hearing for the bungled motion, a script was followed. Mr. Fierberg repeatedly stated he and his firm had not seen the very phone logs they tacked on to the motion being heard! The bankruptcy judge conducted the hearing as though Berger Singerman did not have those phone logs ... even though the motion, filed under seal, had those logs attached (docket entry #1074 Case No 97-14687-BKC-AJC). In late 2004, under order, Mr. Fierberg delivered to me an incomplete copy of the sealed record and for the motion — the incriminating phone logs had been ripped off.
On November 16, the Government had refused to turn over the phone logs and had provided a copy of the logs to the bankruptcy judge. There were only two ways Berger Singerman could have gotten those logs by December 4: 1) the bankruptcy judge gave them to Berger Singerman through an off-the-docket secret order issued between November 16 and December 4 (when the motion was filed with the logs), or 2) the Government delivered the logs under an off-the-docket sealed order. Either way, the logs were delivered and findings were made that addressed all objections raised by the Government.
A key objection raised by the Government, was a private bankruptcy trustee's status respecting the Department of Justice so that he and everyone associated with him could be considered a law enforcement official entitled to access to government tapes. The off-the-docket order had to resolve that issue in Berger Singerman's favor for Juval Aviv, alleged Epstein intimidator William Riley, and all other unnamed "investigators" to come under the umbrella of being government law enforcement officers entitled to access protected law enforcement tapes. So the "investigators" had all become secret government law enforcement officers and thereby entitled to the tapes.
Throughout the Jeffrey Epstein fiasco, everyone was aware of the importance of the Epstein - Bear Stearns connection to building a case against Bear Stearns insiders and the pending Bear Stearns Cayman Islands Hedge Fund trials. Epstein's constant "furloughs" to his attorney's office was supposed to be for that very purpose. Yet, publicly unknown and concealed, were the events that allowed Bear Stearns the extraordinary special treatment of taking control of the USAO and FBOP, to illegally wiretap and steal protected law enforcement materials. This was at least as embarrassing as the reported threats made by Epstein's attorneys to the USAO lawyers and the simultaneous exposure of these events would have had heightened impact and further charges of sweetheart deals for anyone connected to Bear Stearns.
Not really ... there is a back door ... a back door so wide that federal law enforcement "badges" were, PEZ mint like
Any corrupt company or individual can use this back door ... as long as they have: a very fat wallet (a few spare million to begin); enormous insider clout (Bear Stearns of Cayman Islands CMO hedge fund scam/fame); and a very special and politically powerful "insider" man to make it all happen (Paul Singerman, of Berger Singerman P.A., of Gibraltar Private Bank & Trust
My last post showed how accused chief Jeffrey Epstein intimidator, P.I. William Riley, had become a secret, protected "officer of the bankruptcy court." However, that was just the beginning. He also became a federal law enforcement agent.
In late 2005, over a year after the district court ordered the bankruptcy court to disgorge the secret bankruptcy record and after repeated denials, the court reporter "found" transcripts of four of the secret hearings held 5 years earlier.
In addition, the hearings were part of a secret trial in which unidentified "confidential agents" testified against me ... not in person, but through the mouths of Berger Singerman attorney James Fierberg (the sworn secret witness against me in the off-the-docket hearing described in my last post) and the self-proclaimed Israeli "hit-man," Juval Aviv ( who I never knew existed until years after he secretly testified against me). Mr. Aviv testified "over the phone," in this "anything goes" secret trial — without being sworn in. He testified, HUAC style, that he had in his hands my secret bank accounts! Every attempt I later made, to obtain the papers, that Mr. Aviv had so effectively waved "over the phone," was met with complete, stonewalled silence. Those obviously fictitious papers were never placed in the sealed record.
The "finding" order resulted from one of the most abusive hearings ever conducted in a U.S. courtroom (the complete details, with transcript, will be fully laid out in a further post). Unsurprisingly, the sanction order was entirely written by Paul Singerman, James Fierberg et.al.. At the discovery hearing, held on no notice, all of my witnesses were ejected from the hearing, including Judge Herbert Stettin (the trustee in the Scott Rothstein bankruptcy) who was the Trust's attorney in the long pending Bear Stearns federal lawsuit that began in 1993. I was completely prohibited from introducing any evidence or witnesses. Thereby, Berger Singerman's "factual findings" in the order were the opposite of actual evidence and, in critical instances, completely fabricated — including the totally bizarre "finding" that I had concealed the existence of the Trust.
In mid 1993, years before my bankruptcy case and only weeks after a Bear Stearns judgment first became final, Bear Stearns named the 1991 Lawrence Family Trust in Federal Court when it began execution on their judgment. In that lawsuit, critically,
Moreover, the Government repeatedly stated that: providing tapes of my recorded phone calls and law enforcement records to Goldberg violated multiple laws and regulations, including the Wiretap Act ("Title 3"), privacy laws and related regulations; that the phone tapes were recorded only for legitimate Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBOP) security concerns and were only accessible to designated law enforcement personnel; and that the bankruptcy court had no authority to issue rulings on communications surveillance matters:
"MR. DEAGUIAR (Attorney for FBOP): ... Your Honor, the Government feels that compliance with the Trustee's request would violate both the Privacy Act found at 18 USC 552 (a), I have copies of that statute as well if you would like, Title 5, and also Title 3 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 found at 18 USC Sections 2510 through 2522, and I have copies of pertinent sections with me as well." Page 7 here.
THOSE PESKY FBI AGENTS:
Mr. Fierberg bitterly and successfully complained that FBI agents had to screen the tapes: "I have been advised this morning that it is, unfortunately, the law enforcement officers themselves, the F.B.I. agents, or whoever, come in and sit down and go through the tapes" (Page 10 here) — Mr. Fierberg was clearly looking ahead. So the pipeline of tapes torrentially flowed directly to Berger Singerman, Juval Aviv, the other unidentified agents (which would include Jeffrey Epstein's P.I., William Riley) ... some of whom then funneled the contents to Bear Stearns senior managing directors Daniel Taub, Mark Lehman, and others.
The pesky FBI — who might ask embarrassing and serious questions about who was actually getting the tapes and how — had been surgically removed from the loop. The Government, without control, ended up conducting illegal wiretapping for Bear Stearns while they were involved in extensive Florida state and Federal court civil litigation against myself and my family.
Years later, after I finally learned of some of the foreign litigation (to be related about in a further post) I could not find a single direct or indirect reference to the tapes. When I raised the matter, Berger Singerman admitted the tapes were never used in British or other foreign litigation — confirming that Bear Stearns was always the intended recipient of the stolen tapes. To this day, I have been stonewalled in every attempt to obtain the British Court records (which would confirm the tapes were never used in Europe and much more), my own phone tapes, or a list of the protected information about me (and everyone I communicated with) that was funneled to Bear Stearns. All I ever saw, in limited foreign court documents I had independently obtained, was a perjured affidavit by Juval Aviv in which he, again, falsely swore he had identified my (fictitious) secret bank accounts.
Two or more off-the-docket wiretap hearings were held, and at least one order was issued between the November 16 and December 5 secret hearings. On December 4, 2000 Paul Singerman filed a sealed motion. It was not served on the Government.
The same day the motion was filed, an off-the-docket hearing was held without a court reporter, as stated in the resulting sealed order from that motion.
However, Berger Singerman had made a colossal blunder when they filed the motion. They had foolishly tacked on to the end of the motion the very phone logs they claimed to be seeking at the hearing held the next day!
The next day, December 5, at the transcribed hearing for the bungled motion, a script was followed. Mr. Fierberg repeatedly stated he and his firm had not seen the very phone logs they tacked on to the motion being heard! The bankruptcy judge conducted the hearing as though Berger Singerman did not have those phone logs ... even though the motion, filed under seal, had those logs attached (docket entry #1074 Case No 97-14687-BKC-AJC). In late 2004, under order, Mr. Fierberg delivered to me an incomplete copy of the sealed record and for the motion — the incriminating phone logs had been ripped off.
On November 16, the Government had refused to turn over the phone logs and had provided a copy of the logs to the bankruptcy judge. There were only two ways Berger Singerman could have gotten those logs by December 4: 1) the bankruptcy judge gave them to Berger Singerman through an off-the-docket secret order issued between November 16 and December 4 (when the motion was filed with the logs), or 2) the Government delivered the logs under an off-the-docket sealed order. Either way, the logs were delivered and findings were made that addressed all objections raised by the Government.
A key objection raised by the Government, was a private bankruptcy trustee's status respecting the Department of Justice so that he and everyone associated with him could be considered a law enforcement official entitled to access to government tapes. The off-the-docket order had to resolve that issue in Berger Singerman's favor for Juval Aviv, alleged Epstein intimidator William Riley, and all other unnamed "investigators" to come under the umbrella of being government law enforcement officers entitled to access protected law enforcement tapes. So the "investigators" had all become secret government law enforcement officers and thereby entitled to the tapes.
Throughout the Jeffrey Epstein fiasco, everyone was aware of the importance of the Epstein - Bear Stearns connection to building a case against Bear Stearns insiders and the pending Bear Stearns Cayman Islands Hedge Fund trials. Epstein's constant "furloughs" to his attorney's office was supposed to be for that very purpose. Yet, publicly unknown and concealed, were the events that allowed Bear Stearns the extraordinary special treatment of taking control of the USAO and FBOP, to illegally wiretap and steal protected law enforcement materials. This was at least as embarrassing as the reported threats made by Epstein's attorneys to the USAO lawyers and the simultaneous exposure of these events would have had heightened impact and further charges of sweetheart deals for anyone connected to Bear Stearns.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)