again with this shit seriously eat a fuckin bowl of dicks, Im asking a simple question what the fuck is your problem you cocksucking loser? Would you rather I say do any of your intelligent fellas have a thought, opinion or fact on my question? You actually took the time to post that you sad jerkoff, who else has an issue with the way someone phrases a legit question involving what this board is all about? haha ur fuckin pathetic

This is a great thread. Really enjoyed reading through it. The funny part is that I happen to know this priest PERSONALLY who vouched for that Franco. Lmao, Ha ha. Looks like he helped him out.
Nicest man. He's our family priest. He performed a memorial service for my father there last March to keep with the tradition. We, being the Alfanos and Scalas help founded that church a hundred years ago.

Alfanosgirl... Yeah, all the stops were pulled on that one. Then again, some pretty ugly shit went down to make this case. Arresting one guy in a wheelchair who had no clue what was happening with the businesses, a secretary who also had no clue, both of whom, thank God, got their charges dismissed.
But now it's time for the cash to come out of the rats pocket. Looks like if "one eyed willie" wants to continue to have his paperwork sealed, he's going to have to pay lawyers to attempt to do so. I have a feeling Capeci and his lawyers aren't giving up on this one =) thanks jerry!


Preet's Team Still Hiding Sex Predator Charges Against FBI Informer In Mob Garbage Case

When Charles Hughes was arrested in 2008 on charges of soliciting sex with a minor, the feds were more than happy to cut a deal with him. All he had to do was plead guilty and wear a wire against the mob. The resulting sting operation resulted in labor racketeering charges against 29 defendants in the waste hauling industry and a major announcement by Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara hailing the case as another crippling blow against the Mafia.
But the case fizzled. All charges against ten defendants were dropped. The remaining defendants got unusually sweet plea deals because prosecutors were not eager to have Hughes questioned about exactly what he was up to when he arrived at a Westchester motel on August 28, 2008 with a package of condoms for a tryst with someone he believed was a 15-year-old girl.
But even though all the charges resulting from Hughes's cooperation have been resolved, and despite an order by a federal judge last August 7 that details of Hughes's own conviction should be released within 90 days, the records still remain a closely guarded secret. First in November, then several times later, Bharara's team came up with a reason to delay the unsealing. And prosecutors still refuse to discuss the whereabouts, or status, of their once prized informant.
Last week, Bharara's office threw in the towel and declined to contest a Gang Land motion filed in April by attorney Richard Dolan with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The motion seeks to enforce the original order by White Plains Federal Judge Kenneth Karas to unseal Hughes's criminal case, and to reverse his follow-up rulings to keep the Hughes court file sealed.
Instead, the feds passed the baton to Hughes, stating in legal papers that the informant would continue the legal challenge to Gang Land's effort to unseal the records. The government's position goes against Justice Department policy regarding openness in the courts, as well as strict laws passed by Congress to protect children from convicted sexual predators.
In a letter to the Second Circuit, assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Blais said the government "takes no position on the merits" and "does not intend to file a brief in this matter." Instead, Blais wrote, "the defendant has emerged as the primary proponent of" keeping the records sealed, and his lawyers would be "opposing Capeci and Gang Land's appeal" of the continued sealing of the file.
Allowing defendants, especially those charged with soliciting sex with a minor, a say in whether their crimes are kept secret, is newly chartered territory. If that was the law of the land, would any defendants want their misdeeds aired publicly? But Bharara's office, which often trumpets its arrests of sexual predators, must believe that Hughes does have that right.
"The Government and (Hughes) have been doing everything possible to delay the determination of the appeal on the merits," Dolan wrote in his reply to the appeals court. He noted that just like the government, the attorney for Hughes waited 90 days, until the deadline day for filing, before submitting non-responsive court papers. "Delay was an important objective in its filing," the lawyer wrote.
Instead of responding to the issues, Hughes's lawyer filed a motion seeking permission to file his papers under seal, even though the attorney "must have known long before the due date for his brief that he was going to seek the relief requested," wrote Dolan, of Schlam Stone & Dolan LLP.
"Because the appeal involves a denial of the public's First Amendment right to obtain access to the files of a federal criminal case that has been pending for some seven years, and because the crime at issue involves a sexual predator who pled guilty to sexual conduct targeted at a minor almost six years ago, it is especially important that the appeal be resolved expeditiously," wrote Dolan.
Any need for sealing the Hughes case certainly ended 19 months ago, when his identity as the cooperating witness was publicly disclosed in a pre-trial court proceeding, Dolan wrote. It more likely ended a year earlier, he wrote, when Carmine (Papa Smurf) Franco and 28 others were arrested on various labor racketeering charges stemming from Hughes's undercover work.
"Obviously," wrote Dolan, "they presented the most immediate threat to Hughes' safety. Thus, any threat to the safety of Hughes and his family, based on his role as the informant in Franco, has already been addressed by whatever protective measures the Government provided to Hughes during the Franco prosecution."
"Presumably," the lawyer continued, "given the position taken by the Government, those protective measures are still in force."
"The cat is out of the bag and there is nothing left about Hughes' identity as the defendant in U.S. v John Doe to justify further sealing," wrote Dolan. "Each day that the sealing remains in effect compounds the problem. As the Supreme Court has warned, openness of the judicial process is 'an inestimable safeguard against the corrupt or overzealous prosecutor and against the compliant, biased or eccentric judge."