My prosecutor is now a criminal defense attorney
As I describe in FAKE, my eBay fraud case was prosecuted by a team led by two Assistant US Attorneys in Sacramento: Michael Malacek and Christopher Sonderby. Because my plea agreement was contingent on my testifying against my accomplices, and one of them went on the lam and evaded arrest for over two years, it took several years for me to be sentenced after I pled guilty. This was a period of great uncertainty for me -- I'd taken responsibility for what I did and had tried to move on with my life, but my ultimate fate shrouded by uncertainty. Although the prosecutors had agreed to recommend to the judge that I be sentenced to a term of probation (and give up my law license, and pay $75,000 in restitution), the final decision was not theirs to make. The judge would be free to sentence me however he saw fit, and judges are under no obligation to follow prosecutors recommendations.
While I endured this lengthy wait for my sentencing hearing, Malacek and Sonderby both moved on in their careers. Malacek now works as in-house counsel for a biotechnology firm in the Bay Area, and Sonderby transferred to the San Jose office of the US Attorney, and was eventually appointed by President Bush to head a DOJ intellectual property enforcement unit in Thailand. They're both very good attorneys and I'm sure they're doing well in their new positions.
Meanwhile, back in Sacramento, my case was assigned to a new prosecutor, Patrick Hanly, a man I'd never met. Hanly assured us that our deal was intact and my attorney told me I had nothing to worry about, but it still made me nervous that my case had been assigned to someone different. I'd spent many hours in meetings with Sonderby and Malacek, and I didn't have any sort of feel for Hanly's opinion of me or my plea agreement. He told my attorney that I'd "gotten a very good deal."
When I finally stood in court on my day of reckoning, over three years after I'd pled guilty, I became terrified when the judge expressed skepticism about whether I deserved the terms of my plea bargain. For a moment, I thought he was going to reject the prosecution's recommendation and send me to prison.
But Hanly came through, and assured the judge that my cooperation had been valuable enough to warrant the lenience the government had requested. The judge honored the terms of my plea bargain and I walked out of court that day very thankful for the way Hanly had stepped up to the plate on my behalf.
I recently learned that Hanly has moved on from the US Attorney's office, and charted a course that is rather unusual for a former federal prosecutor: He's become a criminal defense attorney specializing in white collar crimes. It's a bold move. Criminal defense attorneys are not generally held in high esteem, and advocating for the accused is often an unpleasant task. But the job of defense attorneys is every bit as important, and sometimes even as heroic, as that of the prosecutors they face in court. We live in a nation governed by laws, and it takes both sides to achieve justice. When the federal government decides to prosecute someone, it has unlimited resources at its disposal, and the person who has been accused deserves good legal representation. Although I don't anticipate ever again needing the services of a criminal defense attorney, if I did, I would want someone like Hanly in my corner. I'm sure he'll do well in his new role.
4 Comments:
“Presumed Guilty” The other side of the story from a “little guy” accused of big white collar crimes…I am currently under Federal indictment and awaiting a trial for allegedly committing white collar crimes I am not guilty of committing. I have never committed a crime of any type, paid my taxes, respected others and even law enforcement. I believed that overall our law enforcement agencies were honest and their agents honorable, I was so very wrong. I operated several small businesses that unfortunately failed to gain enough funding to realize their full potential. Many of my investors and clients were retirees...THEY LOST MONEY, and I have to take responsibility for someone else’s poor choices. Everyone's a Victim now, especially the elderly! I am very sorry that people lost money and would do anything within reason to change the past, but that's not going to happen! I wanted to give everyone my side of the story or at least a summary of it.
My life, marriage, and reputation have all been flushed down the toilet. I spent over $100,000 on paying for the best legal advice I could find, a prominent securities attorneys and I even had a full time corporate Attorney on staff plus he was a major shareholder and I STILL GOT INDICTED ANYWAY, AMAZING ISN’T IT? My disclosures were over the top and my agreements very detailed. In 2002, the State of California sued me and by default won an eight figured multi-million dollar judgment against me personally. I went Bankrupt, started drinking heavily, friends disappeared, I was the subject of multiple search warrants in march of 2003 which produced nothing that was not already on public file.
Mistakes were made by me, I took risks and they did not pay off. Are we going to prosecute everyone who dares take a risk? Entrepreneurs are the life blood of this mighty country! Guilt has been presumed since the beginning. "PRESUMED GUILTY" First with ridiculous civil judgments and penalties for untold millions and when no assets turned up after a few years, a criminal indictment is sought after and it's almost a word for word copy of the States Civil case, Imagine that?
The trial could take months because I have over 100 Witnesses I want to call and the A-USA will have that and more. Their case is very weak but will probably be effective, the prosecutor will simply parade dozens of seniors who will sob and point at me…Sounds like a fair trial with a jury of my peers, right?
"Presumed Guilty" Hand cuffed, booked, stripped, searched, finger-printed, kept in jail for two weeks, made bond-cannot have a glass of wine, was subject to drug testing with the lowest life crack heads in my area, every week, I have to report in each week, I have to have permission to leave the city I live in for any reason. I cannot work in any of the fields I have experience in or am licensed to work in. ALL THIS AND still no trial.
Sincerely,
“Presumed Guilty”
The average American investor has become a "wussie". They definitely are not true risk takers !! Americans love a deal upfront but when the risk turns out badly they cry like babies and then look to the government prosecution machine for relief. "Wussie" investors along with a "mommy will solve" government are ruining the American entrepenurial spirt. Risk takers along with investors that have courage and integrity built this country. I have an old friend who used to say "when the risk taker and entrepeneur are harrassed by the American government for taking a risk, it will be the end of Americas leadership in the world economy"
This is very true and I think we are there. Many other countries understand "investment risk" much better than America, especially China and India. Without risk takers there is no business and without business there is no America, or at least a non-socialist America. Giving an informed investor an opportunity to take a risk is not yet against the law - or is it ????
Im close to retirement and will soon leave this country, as its government has defintely lost its way! Unfortunately, I think many of this countries best and brightest are doing the same thing.
How sad !!
There is some truth to what you've written, but I still believe in the American capitalist system and its built-in self-correcting mechanisms. Sometimes we need the government to step in when a "risky investment" is really just a fraudulent scheme in disguise. A system that allows unchecked fraud eventually becomes bogged down by a murky sludge of corruption and mistrust, and doesn't work as well as a system that strives for fair play.
Consider the American securities markets. They were, until relatively recently, a rigged game that could only be won by insiders. It was only when the SEC was formed, and rules were adopted and (sometimes) enforced, that middle class people began to trade stocks in earnest, and we've all benefited from the massive economic growth this has fostered.
Does the government always get it right? Of course not. Sometimes the feds target people for prosecution unfairly. The recent Attorney General scandal is a shockingly clear example. As I explain in my book, I spent some time feeling unfairly targeted for what I did, and it was difficult for me to come to terms with the implications of my actions and the consequences they wrought, and accept the fact that the federal government spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to convict me for shill bidding on eBay. But I'd still rather live in a society that strives for fairness in business than in one that lets things run amuck, and I think our country does a better job of balancing the need for oversight with its citizens' right to individual freedom.
Say what you want about America, but I don't think you could fairly characterize it as a place that penalizes, discourages, or obstructs entrepreneurial success in the way that some of the more socialist European countries do. At the same time, it's not a place where you can bribe your way out of a traffic ticket, just like it's not a place where a construction company can bribe an inspector into approving a cheaply-made bridge that will collapse in two years. (China? India?) The strength of our capitalist system is shaped by this balance. It, and our unwavering belief in meritocracy, is what sets us apart from most of the rest of the world. If there's anything that makes me feel patriotic, it is this. I'm sticking around.
Seems like you have bought it hook, line and sinker. Which is fine and understandable. I simply prefer to make my own decesions- I dont need a "mommy" government making them for me or helping me make them. I am fully capable of determining a good deal from a bad deal without government interference. A "mommy" government is only needed when you have unqualified individuals investing.
These are the same people who cry when the risk turns upside down. And like I said they call in the government prosecution machine, even though they accepted the risk. Look at your situation you had a buyer who wanted the Diebenkorn - evidently authenticated or unauthtenicated. If he was willing to buy it for your price under those conditions then the government has no role in the transaction. A prime example of the "mommy" state. The buyer, evidently is too stupid to help himself so they will help him, even when he does'nt want it. That is definitely not "capitialism".
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home