Thursday, March 24, 2011


Last week in Philadelphia, Judge Renee Cardwell Hughes lashed out at a financial arrangement between a criminal defendant and his employer, concerning the payment of his legal bills.

Such an arrangement, she said, would give the defendant a disincentive to speak against his employer.

In the case of Rev. James Brennan, a Catholic priest accused of rape, the Philadelphia Archdiocese agreed to pay his bills only if he were acquitted. This, Hughes said, would dissuade Brennan from implicating the Archdiocese, even if doing so were in his own best interest (or in the interest of justice in general).

We wonder if it ever occurred to any other judges in Pennsylvania that people are disinclined to implicate the people paying their legal bills?

For example, virtually every single witness who testified to the "Bonusgate" grand jury in 2007 and 2008 was represented by a lawyer who was paid and assigned by the House Democratic Caucus.

"Who the hell is the caucus?" grand jury Judge Barry Feudale famously wrote in his commentary on 28th Statewide Investigating Grand Jury Report Number One.

The caucus, in 2007 and 2008, (and all the way back to 1990) was H. William DeWeese.

As the leader, as no one seems to comprehend, DeWeese was the only person with the authority to disburse caucus funds. For bonus payments or for legal fees. Responsibility rested with DeWeese. Decisions were made by DeWeese.

In other words, Gubernatorial Candidate Tom Corbett in 2007 set out to investigate a caucus that had been led for the better part of two decades by DeWeese, with witnesses counseled by lawyers chosen, assigned and paid by DeWeese.

At least one Pennsylvania judge seems to understand the conflict of interest that might create.


Anonymous said...

The Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General with one immunity witness has to wonder if even Mike Manzo with an ego bigger than Green Dome might begin to question himself.

Prosecutors offered Manzo immunity when this all started, two years after he was fired by DeWeese after a careful investigation to find out what Manzo and his own personally selected gang of overpaid mutual mates of wives and husbands were going wild on abuse and secrecy.

All Manzo had to do to guarantee his continued lobbying and save his wife's pension was to tell the truth to a grand jury.

But Manzo was torn to shreds by Veon’s Lawyers on the stand under oath.

DeWeese went before the Grand Jury without being afraid since he knows the full truth of his innocence. Only a righteous man does that these days.

DeWeese’s Lawyer tore apart the Commonwealth’s Prosecutors case so effective at the Preliminary Hearing the State Prosecutors pulled their other witnesses from testimony out of fear of losing their weak case right there.

This should have been a sign to these Prosecutors are on soft and earthquake ground worse than parts of Japan right now.

Even worse, the US Supreme Court is looking for cases to reign in Prosecutors using misconduct to seek convictions instead of going after the truth or seeking to elect a Governor by any means possible.

Manzo knew what would happen, if you are willing to cheat on your fiancée, secretly hire a woman without your Bosses knowledge above a Cigar Shop rented by Veon, you have to be willing to lie, to say the least immunity or no immunity.

Otherwise, you are going to look like Attorney Foreman in front of Court or you can have the jail cell next to others.

Manzo told several people and under oath, that he just “believed” that DeWeese knew about the Bonuses but under oath he never knowingly could know for sure.

Manzo’s testimony was credible against Veon, Cott, and Rosepink but cannot hold up against DeWeese.

There is a sense in some sections of the trial's mass audience that this is little but another example of government waste for the election of Tom Corbett.

Especially since Bill DeWeese refused a cover up and hires former Republican Prosecutors to investigate the Democratic Caucus.

There is now another investigation going on to calibrate government waste along with prosecutor’s misconduct policy.

On the list of things we should not be doing, prosecuting Bill DeWesse is high at the top of the lists.

It is not an overstatement that nothing short of the legal system itself is compromised when people, prosecutors commit misconduct, and immunity witnesses think they can lie with impunity in a court of law.

Further, by Mike Manzo’s lobbying in Harrisburg with permission from the Office of the Attorney General it is clear what persist is an insidious public trust issue targeting people that reformed the Caucus is a poor investment for the Office of Attorney General.

Who knows, maybe even the Jurors and US Supreme Court will notice?

Signor Ferrari said...

DeWeese went before the Grand Jury without being afraid

Of course he wasn't afraid; he thought the deal he struck with Corbett on "Bonusgate" extended to all his illegal activities.

Anonymous said...

PA Court rules emails stored on a personal computer are not public records

PA In a January 6 opinion issued by a Pennsylvania appellate court panel, the court established that emails and documents stored by a township commissioner on his or her personal computer were not considered public records.

The court felt that the commissioner alone could not act on behalf of the township and thus the records on his personal computer could not be considered public records. Terry Mutchler, executive director of the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records has voiced concern over the ruling due to its capacity to create a loophole for officers to avoid the law.

It is unknown if the decision will be appealed.

Anonymous said...

DeWeese unafraid???So unafraid he took 5th amendment rather than testify? Wich truth is DeWeese's truth. He knew, but it's not a crime. He knew nothing. He knew but the saving grace is everyone did it? He did it,made a deal, cooperated so only staff should operated not to be prosecuted?

You say DeWeese's attorney (of Jane Orie fame) tore prosecutor's case apart at the prelim hearing so prosecutors didn't present most of their witnesses. Isn't it really that their case was so compelling they won at prelim even without introducing most scheduled witnesses? That's what happened.

You say all Manzo had to do to continue lobbying/save wife's pension was tell the truth. But going on 3 years after arrest, he is still lobbying with same firm as last 3+ years, and his wife's pension is secure. In fact she's not charged with a felony any more.

What is interesting is upcoming sentencing for Scott Brubaker, who testified he lied to the AG and he and Manzo were the masterminds of bonuses - he says with Veon approval; and Manzo who admitted he was the most responsible for bonuses, testified he used jobs for sex, and he lied in mtgs with AG, in grand jury testimony and in court testimony. I see state time!

Finally, of the original 12 - 2 were acquitted, and at least 4 others (counting Rachel Manzo) - that's half - lost no pension.

Anonymous said...

DeWeese hasn't testified against anyone on anything. If he had immunity, why didn't they announce it the way they did for everyone else? DeWeese was exonerated on Bonusgate because the evidence wasn't there, not because of some immunity. And the previous writer is right, the case against DeWeese is crumbling. Kevin Sidella was supposedly a full-time campaign worker on state time - then that dropped to about 40 percent of the time during the preliminary hearing. Which is it? Kevin and Manzo have very big credibility issues. DeWeese wasn't even in the office most of the time - that's documented. Manzo techically reported to DeWeese but was selected by Veon. Sidella was selected by Manzo and Veon. DeWeese was out debating legislation, visiting every district in the state and attending thousands of events. Veon ran the inside game. That's why DeWeese was exonerated - again, the evidence simply wasn't there.

Anonymous said...

I respectfully disagree Signor, in any event, and anyway one wants to spin it, Bill DeWeese went before the Grand Jury without Immunity and that is still a mark of an honest man with nothing to hide.

Sometimes Justice is too fixed within the limits of the law instead of the charity within one's heart.

Mike Veon, Brett Cott, and Annamarie Perretta-Rosepink did not deserve the guilty convictions based upon the immunity testimony of staffers that did not tell the entire truth, as the jury pointed out afterwards.

If the convictions were wrong on Veon, Cott and Rosepink, the charges on DeWeese are just as wrong.

"I have drunk not to the clouding of my reason, but just so much that I can still surely distinguish the syllables with my tongue." Athenaeus

Anonymous said...

How perfect for you - to say whatever you want because it pleases you - it is missing everything that matters.

Great Leadership in any form in anyone is about trust, responsibility, taking the weight for your choices and feelings, and spending the rest of your life living up to them.

Above all, not hurting others that made the choice to hurt you to save them.

As Bill DeWeese often says about those attacking him falsely or hurtfully, that is on them not me.

Signor Ferrari said...

If he had immunity, why didn't they announce it the way they did for everyone else?

Because it was a boneheaded move, and Corbett knows it makes him look like a bonehead? Besides, it's probable that he didn't have full immunity - just a "negotiated" agreement that the documentary evidence he turned over would not be used against him, and the witnesses whose subpoenas he agreed to stop fighting would not be asked about his involvement.

That's why DeWeese was exonerated - again, the evidence simply wasn't there.

The evidence wasn't there because he didn't turn it over (at least, not most of it - obviously, a bit of it slipped through), and because the witnesses who testified to the grand jury were not asked about his involvement. If he were innocent, why did he plead the Fifth at Veon's trial?

Anonymous said...

Once again, Signor Ferrai you cannot use the words, "It's Probable" or Maybe "Negotiated" as proof in any court of law.

In fact, it is proof he did not have Immunity since he the Grand Jury Presentment charged DeWeese, that is not probability, negotiations, or secret deals.

Additionally, it is on record that Todd Eachus when he took over as Majority Leaders and at the urging Eachus Outside Counsel Casey urged the indictment of Bill DeWeese with the OAG Prosecutors.

It was Todd Eachus and Casey that went to court in an attempt to find out about the witnesses and whose subpoenas that Eachus agreed to stop fighting not DeWeese.

I might add even CasablancaPA has put up articles here wondering why Todd Eachus escaped to date all investigations and whose Grand Jury opportunity was never explained why he was not Indicted?

Finally, it is now recognized Veon, Cott, and Perretta-Rosepink Lawyers made several errors at Trial in hindsight, of course but gave it their all.

The big error was trying to pin it all on DeWeese when the evidence was not there and subsequently everyone including DeWeese has the Right to the Fifth Amendment, the same Fifth Amendment that Veon, Cott, and Perretta-Rosepink took by not testifying at their Trial.

Veon, Cott, and Perretta-Rosepink Lawyers should have concentrated on Todd Eachus that was there running the Re-elections and elections of all Caucus Members.

Yet, it is strange that Todd Eachus was not even brought in to testify at Trial and Casey too, on their urgings to indict other members?

The Defense Team lawyers knew very well Bill DeWeese was not there running those elections.

In fact, even Mike Veon was not hands on those Caucus Elections as much as Todd Eachus was the King Pin as he bragged about it on his legislative website.

Yet, Veon, Cott, Perretta-Rosepink lawyers ignored it as that should be the Keystone of the Defense?

Subsequently, only Mike Veon and Brett Cott were sentenced beyond all reasonable justice and Annemarie Perretta-Rosepink admitted she did the crimes they accused all of them on to prevent Jail Time.

I for one felt the entire Trial was a Travesty of Justice and conducted badly by Judge Lewis over the rights, privileges, and prosecutors misconduct errors and rulings.

I pray all the convictions are overturned on Appeal but none of it can laid before Bill DeWeese door and his Trial will prove Prosecutors Misconduct if it goes forward and may add to the Appeals.

Signor Ferrari said...

Signor Ferrai you cannot use the words, "It's Probable" or Maybe "Negotiated" as proof in any court of law.

This is a blog, not a court of law. And the deal Corbett and DeWeese struck wasn't illegal, just politically embarrassing for both of them.

it is proof he did not have Immunity since he the Grand Jury Presentment charged DeWeese, that is not probability, negotiations, or secret deals.

That is proof that he did not have immunity regarding the alleged illegal activities that went on in his district office, not regarding the alleged illegal activities at the center of "Bonusgate." The charges on the allegations of illegal campaigning in his district office are a blatant attempt by Tom Corbett to distract attention away from DeWeese's culpability in Bonusgate. A deal on one crime is not free rein on every crime.

it is on record that Todd Eachus when he took over as Majority Leaders and at the urging Eachus Outside Counsel Casey urged the indictment of Bill DeWeese with the OAG Prosecutors.

Where is that on record, please?

even CasablancaPA has put up articles here wondering why Todd Eachus escaped to date all investigations and whose Grand Jury opportunity was never explained why he was not Indicted?

We have indeed. Does that explain why DeWeese was not indicted in Bonusgate?

Anonymous said...

Well, if this is just a blog that is going to spin whatever, it hurts your creditability and calls for justice does it not?

There was an Attorney-Client Privilege Case brought by Todd Eachus using Taxpayers Money to Casey and Eachus lost that from what I heard.

As in Ramaley Case, the OAG Case was motivated for political reasons as seen by the election of Republican Senator Vogel and DeWeese has even a better case in his defense than Ramaley.

Prosecutors Misconduct is also present on the record and will come out before trial.

But spin it anyway you want, the truth crushed into the earth only rises again.

As you said, this is a blog, not a court of law, so facts do not matter.

Yet, I still feel Veon, Cott, and Rosepink-Perretta were badly served at trial under circumstances hard to handle in a one sided way in all fairness and that was in a court of law.

As I said a travesty of justice of intimidation, bullying, immunity buying protection of jobs and pensions, and the real culprits free to work on jobs they admitted never existed and of course, Tom Corbett is Governor.

And Todd Eachus who really ran the Caucus during Bonusgate elections is doing what these days and with whom?

Bottom line, if you are going to just spin wrong facts here, than hypocrisy is a two way street for you too.

But you now admit anything goes on a blog so why blog anymore with that low standard of mis-purpose accomplishing nothing but what more spin or the true pursuit of justice for all?

I still pray the Appeals come your way because you did not deserve this misjudgment no mattervwhat Rosepink-Perretta later recanted.

Anonymous said...

Bad enough a number of in justices have occurred and hurt many people such as Ramaley, Veon, Cott, Rosepink-Peretta on what is best ethical violations not criminal I can see why anyone should wish it on another such as Bill DeWeese.

Anonymous said...

Why keep saying DeWeese was "exonerated" with respect to bonuses? He was certainly never exonerated. In answer to press queries the former AG clearly said the fact DeWeese wasn't charged DIDN'T mean he was exonerated. Lots of people clearly implicated were not charged;they were legally unindicted co-conspirators. That includes most granted immunity. If DeWeese refused to testify due to a legitimate concern he would incriminate himself...that's not exoneration. Get real.

What do you think he meant when he said "our saving grace is that everyone does it"?