Former DC Madam civil and criminal counselor Montgomery Blair Sibley has been doing some filings recently, all covered in the press, and he wants to release the subpoenaed Verizon phone records for reasons I won't go into based on confidentiality, a promise I have made to a source. The development comes at an interesting time and I cannot fault the man for doing what he's doing and even wish him well, I hope he's successful.
His claim that there are 815 names in the subpoenaed phone records is correct, however, I never noticed any major political names and have not gone back to them or Dan Moldea's searches of her phone records that Jeane herself entrusted to myself and others for the purposes of research for her case.
I would add that since 2008, I haven't had anyone request or tell me either telephonically, via email, or served through the postal service, to return any of those materials, not that I could if I tried since they've been so thoroughly disseminated as to render that impossible. That being stated, and I say this as a layman, I seriously doubt that anyone could even claim jurisdiction over me and them. In fact, I've published some of them on here, the raw information, but only specific names.
Here's the thing: Nearly all of the names we were able to dig deeper on are published online anyway. The Chief U.S. Courts judge, a fellow named Roberts, God help us, really just seems to hate Sibley along with the rest of the legal establishment in DC and won't let him release and publish (the most important aspect, I believe, that right) them, hoping, Sibley said, to affect the outcome of the political elections. Can he? Will he? Should he?
It's possible that the names are of people who rose since I last looked at them, I don't know, frankly, there were so many.
Where does that leave me? Yes, stuck in the middle, again, somewhere in Dante's limbo, on the outskirts of mortality.
Jeane never told me or Mr. Sibley to return that information, the files, the phone numbers, the scans of her phone bills, or anything at all. Neither has the Palfrey Estate in all of eight years. I believe their time is well up seeing that the phone records were probably released online at Jeane's bequest by Citizens for Legitimate Government, hence by Lori Price. It was never a great idea to put those phone bills online for the defense, but, I must add that the above parts of this paragraph are simply my conclusions and opinions, albeit very informed ones.
Are there more names of importance in the phone records? Why wouldn't they have been found already? I'm skeptical but might be induced to take another look, maybe, just maybe, if I cared enough to. It's mostly a closed door for me.
I have communicated with Mr. Sibley recently. That being said, no, I'm staying mum out of respect.
Showing posts with label Montgomery Blair Sibley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Montgomery Blair Sibley. Show all posts
Thursday, February 18, 2016
Thursday, July 18, 2013
Wayne Madsen & Me
Where to begin with this guy? OK, I'm not going to, but at some point this well known crank got involved with the DC Madam case doing--I have no idea what the hell he did for Jeane, frankly, but it couldn't have been much since he wasn't hired by her to do general research for her defense. For several months I did this work for Jeane at her request (I had a co-researcher who had also been tapped for this work).
Initially, we looked into what was then known as the "Poway Mafia," that is, former-and-convicted California congressman Randy Cunningham, convicted-and-former defense contractor Brent Wilkes, the convicted-and-former "number three" guy at the CIA, Kyle Foggo, and a few other players who Jeane felt were related to he case. There was a lot smoke there, but we were only able to go so far with limited resources and time. At the end of the project, we, that is me and my co-researcher, made reports as to the aforementioned--how these players related to her and the escort service and why she was being prosecuted in such a manner. Also, we looked deeply into subpoenaed Verizon phone records that went far deeper than the scanned copies that were and still are online, basically who had a specific phone number, and when, numbers that were in her records as potential client-callers. I was paid by the federal defender's office, normal for indigent defendants, then did the rest pro bono.
Jump to two weeks ago: the UK's paper the Guardian/Globe, without vetting his wacky, rumpled self mistakenly quoted Wayner in an article about an EU deal with the NSA allowing them to conduct massive surveillance. I don't even care about the details, because, yes, he was an NSA analyst at once time, ages ago, claims to still have "sources" inside, or in the intelligence community, writes crappy, baseless articles about it, and is generally ignored as a nut in DC and the rest of the sane, civilized world, and for good reason. If you're a normal, well-balanced human being, go read his writing and tell me he's not nutty as hell. I don't see it happening.
The Globe had to pull a front page article quoting Wayner. Of course, it being the UK, the rest of the press there swarmed around the publication and wrote about it, gleefully. I was a little shocked, but unsurprised, when Damian Thomspon wrote a pretty scathing blog piece at the Telegraph about Madsen and the Globe. I won't recount it and leave it to the reader to check it out and decide for themselves, but in my humble opinion, it's spot-on.
I left this comment two weeks ago after reading it:
Thursday, January 03, 2013
Qualcomm being sued by NY State Comptroller over political donations
Without any prompting, Qualcomm came around my blog J to the Power of 7 on a word search over Montgomery Blair Sibley. This was around three years ago. I had no idea why they came around, but when I did a little research, I found that they also do intelligence and defense contracting…and they have a revolving door policy between their executives and those at Ernst & Young, a major corporate services firm that specializes in corporate audits, and yes, the books that get cooked.
The latter firm is involved in uncovering such things in corporate institutions, but also have had allegations thrown at them on several occasions that they helped to cover it up. What does that have to do with the DC Madam? It might not be anything specific beyond the fact that her former prosecutor, Jeffrey A. Taylor, a Bush II interim appointee who was never fired by incoming president-elect, Barack Obama, and went on to a cushy legalistic job at Ernst & Young. Now, why would someone at Qualcomm do that word search on Mr. Sibley? I have no idea and have never expected a straight answer out of them–don’t have the resources, or the inclination to bother looking into it, life’s too short. But the fact remains that both firms are very closely-linked, Taylor works for Ernst, and someone felt compelled at the sister firm of Qualcomm to do research over Mr. Sibley. When I brought it to his attention, he seemed pretty interested–as interested as I was. It was just one more bizarre “coincidence” from the case. I don’t know if Taylor is still working at Ernst & Young these days, but I would assume so. What’s of interest to me is the connection not only to computer chips and CPUs made by Qualcomm, but their relationship with the Pentagon and American intelligence community, perhaps one similar to SAIC’s, another major league contractor. Qualcomm was never in Jeane’s phone records, but I believe someone fucked up here and showed their hand, for which I thank them!
And now, the Comptroller of NY State, Thomas P. DiNapoli, a Democrat, is suing Qualcomm over political donations to force transparency. NY State is one of the biggest shareholders in the corporation, and is asserting her interest in the firm. This is reasonable since the risks are very high to public investors, especially when so many were burned in the banking crisis of 2008 thanks to widespread securities fraud. This is a major reason for the economic crisis in countries like Greece, for example, just one of many. Consider that when politicians in DC start screaming for austerity measures because of the deficit. Hundreds of billions were spent to keep a lot of crooks afloat. That's called being robbed twice.
Here’s more at the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/nyregion/new-york-comptroller-sues-qualcomm-for-data-on-political-giving.html?hpw&_r=1&
And my observations on them in relation to the DC Madam case (the earliest are most pertinent): http://chickasawpicklesmell.blogspot.com/search?q=Qualcomm
Wednesday, January 02, 2013
and we have a facebook page!
Here it is, yo: http://www.facebook.com/LetTheDeadBuryTheDeadByMatthewJanovic
Thanks Andrea! I tried to give her a book for free, but nothing doing! Who wants to take bets on how fast DHS or trolls abusing the complaints system there get it taken down? Doesn't matter, all the content you need is right here, so hit those labels! (DC Madam, Palfrey, Montgomery Blair Sibley, Pamela Martin, David Vitter, Jack Burkman, Brent Wilkes, Randy Cunningham, Thomas Kontogiannis, and so on.)
Thanks Andrea! I tried to give her a book for free, but nothing doing! Who wants to take bets on how fast DHS or trolls abusing the complaints system there get it taken down? Doesn't matter, all the content you need is right here, so hit those labels! (DC Madam, Palfrey, Montgomery Blair Sibley, Pamela Martin, David Vitter, Jack Burkman, Brent Wilkes, Randy Cunningham, Thomas Kontogiannis, and so on.)
Friday, December 21, 2012
dc madam trial transcripts
Ed.--These files are not complete, although they're complete within themselves. There is no voir dire. I also believe the evidence was poorly documented, but it wasn't necessary to the documents. Insofar as I know, this will be the first time anyone, anywhere online has uploaded these for public consumption. Read 'em and weep, I did. The trial was a farce, hence why the transcripts aren't readily available, in my opinion. I don't give a shit who has a problem with it. The bottom document is related and covers a lien placed on Jeane's former residence over legal bills. Once again, you may not have fries with that.
March 19, 2008 pretrial hearing (.txt file): https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3zDKjQ92CiyYXlpZVRHblduMmM/edit
April 8, 2008 (day two/ .txt file): https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3zDKjQ92CiyRXRveGY2c3ZzYUk/edit
April 9, 2008 (day three/ .txt file): https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3zDKjQ92Ciyd1pLc1oxbm9VakE/edit
April 10, 2008 (day four/ PDF): https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3zDKjQ92CiyXzVuMDA4Sm1UME0/edit
April 14, 2008 (final day/PDF): https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3zDKjQ92CiyRkJHWGFGSXk5VlU/edit
December 10, 2008 Court lien order over Palfrey estate legal debts to Montgomery Blair Sibley (PDF): https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3zDKjQ92CiyaWJCNlRTV0YyVFE/edit
Postscript, 12.22.2012: Does any of this read like a real trial where Anglo-American principles of justice were being applied? If so, I have a bridge and swampland to sell you. What the hell was Preston Burton thinking beyond having to work with his peers again after this bullshit charade? This is where Sibley was at least genuinely adversarial. What did Burton do to convince Jeane to lay down and die, to agree to mounting no goddamned defense at all?
To be fair, and I can only look at this as a layman, his cross-examinations of the witnesses were solid, appropriate, what you'd expect, but little more was done beyond that. Was he on the side of the defendant at all? This wasn't a trial, it was theater, the political kind, to cover for the GOP and various selfish interests. Shame. Pathetic. This is how not only democracy dies but the human race. You got it: no one gives a shit. RIP America.
And, for a better understanding of them:
http://www.amazon.com/Let-Dead-Bury-Madam-account/dp/1480297437/ref=sr_1_10?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1353888194&sr=1-10&keywords=Let+the+Dead+Bury+the+Dead
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
important accouncement on the upcoming DC madam account
The final manuscript is now locked at 622 pages, after adjusting for formatting, so that's everything, nothing removed, index included. I couldn't be more proud. There are no rules and there is no road map writing a historical account, there is only you and whatever wits you might possess. For even the most independent-minded of us, this is like walking a tightrope over a lava pit, and it is an excruciating, awful process writing about yourself. What's right? When you first start out, it goes well beyond writer's block. There's a natural hesitancy not to want to, not simply because we all tend to paint ourselves as better than we really are. I'm pretty certain that in the span of human history, there have been no people on this earth who were able to get around that problem wholly. No one's exempt.
That's not to say that people consciously lie--I haven't in my account in any place, on any page--but that we're all pretty much the same, and who wants to look at themselves as a piece of shit? No, the BDSM crowd don't count, sorry. Maybe it's part of the Cartesian-split, the mind-body problem, that we aren't always good at looking at ourselves because we've been taught how to look at the world incorrectly.
Unlike Jeane and a lot of people in America, I don't believe we live after death. What I believe is that mind came from body, and that we die with this body. Why isn't it obvious that our mind and bodies are one? Religion, but it's a problem also embedded in science, politics, culture, you name it, it's pervasive. I'm not a total materialist, or an atheist, but agnostic. Life has enough mysteries to be pretty bizarre. For some reason, this isn't enough for some people, I don't get it. Yes, dying isn't great--it's not supposed to be. Accept it or not, but we're all going to die one day, so live it up. Unfortunately, yes, some of us are going sooner than others. That's what will always bother me about this goddamned case. Jeane died before her time, it was avoidable. They let her die, we, let her die in our indifference, the same apathy that's given us the biggest police state apparatus in human history. The flaw in Western thinking is this weird idea that things are separate when they're not. We poison our water and believing we're removed enough from it that we don't need to worry about it, let the people downstream deal with it, fuck 'em. We've gone crazy enough to believe that we can now control the weather. We believe that people are separate from one another, when this is completely untrue--just watch how an outbreak of something spreads, just one example. It's some hippie crap to say that we're all interconnected, when it's the simple truth. The Occult tradition in the West produced this gem of wisdom: whatever you put out there comes back, multiplied. (Often in threes, justice found in mathematics no less.) Knowledge is power, but so is wisdom, and you learn the latter through terrible suffering, the kind that makes death look inviting.
I believe that I've overcome most of that tendency to recast myself as someone wearing a white hat, hence the pain, and brother, there is no pain like it. Nothing touches how deep it reaches inside of you and tears you apart. You cannot fault yourself for accidents or errors--mistakes--that no one could have had control over. It's not that I was self-deprecating in the writing of this book, it's that I and many other people failed someone, and so there it is again: We're all the same and are imperfect. That's what being a human being is, to be flawed, judged by the very standards we made up along the way, more often through habit. Talking can be addictive. Everything is an addiction. Reading is an addiction. Watching is an addiction. Food is an addiction. Drinking too much water can become intoxicating and ultimately kill you. Sex, as everyone knows, can be an addiction to the point that it becomes unhealthy. We all have a lot of habits to break. Whether I break the writing habit remains to be seen.
The book will, I hope, stand on its own legs, and that word will get out far and wide about it. That, of course, is up to me, but also you, the reader, to spread the word if you believe I've gotten most of the story right. I think it's going to be a mixed-bag: there are so many things in it that are simply factual, and opinions about facts mean nothing. Most of the book is my participation in the case. I will be writing more as the release date approaches at another location, probably copying to here as well, so either site will be a go.
There is not one thing, one line, one quote, anything, that was put into my account that I knew or believed to be untrue. I haven't included many things--you would end up with a book over 1,000 pages long, easily. The reader should come away from the book feeling that not only was this about someone's experience, therefore a primary historical document, but that it's a reference book. I can say with absolute certainty that there has never been a book like this, and that's not knocking Montgomery Blair Sibley's book, Why Just Her, just the opposite, I think they're complimentary of each other, one augmenting the other. While I didn't use quite as much legal language--legalese--I believe it will stand up over time as part of the case, its residue. A couple of centuries ago, writing on historical events was considered a form of literature. For that and the sake of readability, there is a literary approach to some of the book, but in the end, this is all my voice. I'm feeling a little hoarse now, and, oddly, that was the meaning of the French surname, Palfrey.
This was almost as bad as being the poor, dumb asshole journalist in Citizen Kane, looking everywhere to find out what all this Rosebud business was about. What were some of Palfrey's deepest secrets? With the CIA thrown into the mix, anything's possible. I cannot claim to know, her family might, and they should be left in peace. It should be taken into consideration that there will almost certainly be things that I'm wrong about in the text, misreadings of events and information, not just by me, but by the subject and many other players, it's inevitable, and none of it would necessarily be conscious. There's smoke down in Hell, which sometimes causes a natural occlusion. And, again, I could simply be wrong about something.
The DC Madam case is a mostly incomplete mosaic, and I make it clear in the text when I'm speculating. This is due mostly to the fact that whole swaths of the record aren't available to the public. There are also selfish motives by any number of people who communicated with Palfrey to sit on what they know, information they might have, but then there are confidentiality agreements. Most of this is understandable in an era where certain information has a very real world value, we all get this by now, even Ret. General Petraeus.
A late November release looks good, but no later than December, a blackened X-Mas present for the GOP to themselves, by way of me, a woman whose death they own.
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
let the dead bury the dead release date & other issues surrounding the text
This is still up in the air. I'll be prepping a standalone site for the book. It should have an excerpt, no you cannot quote from it or republish without permission, period. Written requests will be fine, and granting use will be completely at the author's discretion. There is no middleman here.
On the media, interviews, reviews copies, etc.: There will be no advance copies, period, and serious inquiries only. Not to be a dick (or to be one to the right people), but I'm not made of money. No free rides, I would if I could. Also, the idea of someone reviewing a book on something so personal seems pretty laughable to me outside of the technical side--style, format, depth, things that are logical and sincere rather than someone playing games. You'll be kicked to the curb immediately the moment I detect you're fucking me around, it's not going to play. That written, I expect the mainstream media to go out of their way to ignore this book because so much of it is about them and how disgusting they truly are, you have no idea.
Even in death, they keep killing her, mark this. CNN is one one of the major offenders: they will occasionally throw a blurb out there on the case either in a crappy documentary on prostitution (often upscale, with the rich & powerful), and the results speak for themselves: a willfully superficial misrepresentation of the case to protect what it was really about, their usual mercenary MO. For this reason, even were they to somehow contact me, they'd have an uphill battle on their hands, and that's putting it mildly. I don't expect to hear from any of them no matter how well the books sells.
You didn't just walk into McDonald's, and no, you cannot have fries with that. I don't value most of your opinions, because you weren't involved. I don't even value those of many others who were, as the book will make plain as day. Yes, they're my opinions, and they're more educated than yours about the case. The only people who probably know more are the former prosecutors and judges, and they're compromised. Don't expect anything honest out of most of them, and many of them cannot tell you anyway thanks to confidentiality agreements. My role was far looser, so I can tell more, much more. But, you don't care about the truth anyway, my whole point here and in the book...
On the cult of personality & writers: When I was a kid, over a generation ago in the 1970s, there was no access to the Internet by the general public. You frequently didn't know what an author looked like, what their life was like or where they'd been, and so on, unless you did a lot of looking and research, and that was costly. Now, it isn't, it's all a few keystrokes away. What's the same between then and now is the cult of personality, which I hate and view as part of the disease of this dying culture and nation. People to others for answers are at the top of my shit-list, so, don't come looking to me for any, that's not my job, it's everyone's. The individual has to look within. Fools don't, cowards won't, and I don't have time either, not one moment, so save the effort. I know almost every trolling approach too, so again, don't bother, I will detect it and you will be removed or ignored. If you don't take a hint, if you harass me, for whatever reason is in your head, as compromised as some of them are, law enforcement and the courts will be brought into play. I'm not fucking around ask people who know me, they'll tell you. They'll also tell you that if you cross the line far enough that I'll be coming for you until I'm satisfied.
On Mark Capansky: I believe this little shithead has been harassing me. Any phony or actual cease and desists without a court order will be duly ignored. And, if I have to publish the book out of some Siberian shithole, I will, maybe even out of Iceland if necessary. I will not bow, because, unlike most of you out there, I have nothing to lose, and everything to gain.
However, if Mr. Capansky wants to explain why his number (or parents') was in the DC Madam's phone records, I'm all ears, and we can keep it off the record. On the other hand, if the dialog devolves into threats--if you even piss me off--it all goes online unredacted. I'm not fucking around here at all. If you want to fuck around, do it with the stupid women that are attracted to such a retard. By the way, I'm not jealous, as the book will make starkly clear. I don't share your hollow values and view America as a criminal, white supremacist nation, and hence, a large part of why it's crumbling, it's dysfunctional. This country sucks, you definitely suck, and go fuck yourself...
On writing a book that's non-fiction, true crime, & a historical document: I don't recommend it. There are no ground rules. Reconsider if it looks like it will take up a stage of your life. I was in my thirties when this began, now I'm rocketing towards the bad side of fifty, fuck you very much.
On literature: The book is very literary. For me, this isn't the usual approach. I do read a lot of fiction, but most of my reading is historical and non-fiction. I have been more of a student of history than anything else. A lot of reading in my life is packed into this book. The reader might find this not to their liking, or anything in-between--these are not my concerns, and unless it's constructive, I don't want hear your opinions beyond pointing-out factual errors, typos, and so on. The case, as the primary materials in the book will show, was riven through with literary references. I wasn't looking for them. They announced themselves. That brings me to...
Occult references & themes in the DC Madam case: These were also present and announced themselves. I wasn't looking for them. However, as Jesus said, for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear, and I do, and did. Most aren't attuned to this, I am, and once again, I'm not interested in the expressions of your egos, only in fact and truth, which the vast majority of you wouldn't know either were they to bite you in the ass extracting a pound of flesh. You couldn't miss this, especially considering the well-established fact that Jeane was fascinated by American Spiritualism (yes, seances, no, I am not a believer).
The case was archetypal on its own. I didn't see anything that wasn't there or implicit to it. Again, your opinions are irrelevant, and I don't care unless they augment and add something to the story, understanding, illuminate it more, whatever, but other than that, don't care.
On the former Pamela Martin escorts: I don't have a lot of respect for these women. Some wrong-headed types do for reasons that escape me, but I'm sure have to do more with gender and identity politics and wishful thinking. Once again, I don't care what you're opinions are unless you somehow had contact with them, know previously unknown aspects and facts about the case, or you have an angle on it I never considered for some of the aforementioned reasons. Beyond that, I don't care and don't want to hear your ego flexing, it won't play and I'll kick your ass to curb.
I'm sure most of my sources have withheld things from me--that's normal, human behavior. I'm not a believer in human nature or unicorns. We have tendencies. Those tendencies come out under certain circumstances and conditions. I'm intolerant of mythmakers and believers of myths. None of these women were saints. Yes, they were paid inadequately--welcome to the contemporary world, welcome to the United States and a world that's primarily ordered along patriarchal lines. I didn't make this world, you didn't, most of us didn't, and I'm not a supporter of it. In fact, I'm one of its victims, fuck you very much. You can beatify these ladies all you want, but when the truth came out, you'd look like the genuine fools with an opinion that you really are. Welcome to the human jungle, now think more often before you open your trap, or when you post something online. We all make mistakes. None of us is made of light, we all shit every morning, if we're lucky. That gut you have going is all the proof you should need that you're not a god. We're all imperfect, we all die one day, and the rest is games, lies, deceit, and horrendous, tragic, stupidity.
Insofar as I have been able to ascertain, no one, and I mean no one, has been able to find and interview these women and get some new relevant information from them, and to publish on it, nary a soul. Only one of them has come my way--allegedly, Andrea Detty who's alleged to be an alleged journalist now--and they may not even be one of them, perhaps a fake online identity, and of course, they weren't willing to convey anything of value whatsoever that I didn't already know. That's because, and this should be no surprise to anyone with their higher functions still intact, they were prostitutes and there's a reason why the term "lying whore" came into being, which I learned from direct experience in the case. Not one of them has had the courage and credibility to come forward and to follow through. One of them approached journalist Ken Silverstein during the proceedings, his moronic secretary lost the phone number they left (why not search of the phone calls that day at Harper's?), and they never reestablished contact. Thanks for fucking us, lady, but at least you tried. The rest stand as rats as far as I'm concerned, the real whores, not Palfrey, and they have earned this derision. Ever heard of confidentiality agreements with journalists, ladies? Quit kidding yourselves that you have credibility. Your silence speaks volumes.
On Jack Burkman of Focus on the Family & a lot more: There's an entire chapter devoted to dear Jack, as a template for the average Republican player in Palfrey's phone records. Expect fireworks. Expect what you suspected and knew--that he's a pathetic asshole, a scumbag, and a hypocrite.
On SAIC's presence in the phone bills and elsewhere: They're key to whatever was behind the case and the charges moving forward, not the actual solicitation by Jeane and the girls, which was what was really the incidental side of it. They're emblematic of the crisis in government today of runaway spending and war profiteering by contractors and politicians. They're connected to so many players in all this that it does have meaning to the case in ways that I never expected, not was looking for, but once again, there it was, winking at me over and over.
On the CIA's role in the case: This will get more of a factual airing than previously, although, regardless of what you might think of him, Montgomery Blair Sibley, Jeane's longest running counselor during the proceedings, has done a good job addressing in his own text, Why Just Her. I recommend it and consider both our accounts complimentary of each other. I'm not going to defend his public behavior. Federal District Judge Gladys Kessler granted wide-ranging subpoenaing power to the Palfrey defense that covered virtually the entire intelligence establishment. Ask yourself why the mainstream media never covered this, then go ask them, over and over again, until they cry uncle.
I'll have more to say later. Search the labels on this article for more. I cannot see a release date of later than late November, but no later than some time in December. That is all.
Monday, October 29, 2012
Nein, es wahrheit.
The book is finished, locked. 700 pages, counting title page, table of contents, and index. For the coloring and picture book crowd, sorry, Bernie Wrightson wasn't available to do a graphic novel version of the prose, very sorry. There will be no photos. Unlike Bugliosi's Helter Skelter, this is the real deal, a real historical account, and therefore, a part of the primary record of the case. No, this is true crime writing done with honesty, rather than being written by some shady cop, compromised D.A., or some other banal, money grubbing piece of shit.
"What a ride!" Jeane once emailed me, from Chicago, at O'Hare Airport between flights. This was fucking depraved in the context of what we'd been saying back-and-forth and when I was certain she was out of her fucking mind and suicidal. No one will ever know what this woman has put me through, and yet, I still pity her and mourn her death, for she was human, and they, her prosecutors and the U.S. Courts let her die.
Let me make this clear: You do not know as much as you think you do about this horrible case, the one that left a woman hanging by the neck by her own hand. I will terminate any conversation and/or interview the moment I detect someone's assuming that some mythical government operatives murdered Deborah Jeane Palfrey, because not only is it not factually true, it's completely baseless. Not one individual with an asshole (what they see in the mirror every morning) and an opinion (that has no value) has presented any solid evidence that Jeane was murdered. Her longest running legal counselor during most of the proceedings, Montgomery Blair Sibley, doesn't believe this "She were suicided" theory either, at least last I checked. Blair had a great deal of direct contact with Jeane, and I think he knows very well that there were some telltale signs. Maybe we miss things, I don't know, but I didn't from the moment I spoke with Palfrey on the telephone, this was someone rocketing towards imminent death. The book will address all of this in extremely graphic detail. Expect to shocked. No one will ever be as shocked as I was when I looked at the entire case and my experiences being involved in it, working for more than a few months doing general research for Jeane, advising her occasionally, offering my opinion when she hit me with questions, very specific ones mind you, and you should feel lucky for that. This book drained me of the last vestiges of my youth, and a whole lot more, but it was worth it. For a brief moment, we all charged the castles, and I'm not fucking around when I write castles, because we have a system of them in the US. (And yes, we can thank the American South for a lot of this.)
This book is bigger than me, and so are its themes. They're eternal ones. Until you confront power directly as I and others have, you just don't know the feeling of ecstasy it can bring, of liberation, a feeling of incredible elation that can only be called freedom. You have to liberate yourself, and we have to liberate each other. We still have a choice in America: Is going to be democracy, or tyranny? Jeane's case collided with the war on terror, she was in the thick of it, I am convinced. This wasn't merely a sex scandal, this was very big, bigger than you can possibly imagine. I can only hope that this account will stand as a document of the case and the era it took place in, a piece of the puzzle, part of a mosaic of our shared history, because this is a story that affects everyone directly, first in our pocketbooks. It's also a political testament. To have been part of a historical event was everything rolled into one. In the beginning, was the word.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Some recent reflections on former DC Madam civil attorney Montgomery Blair Sibley
I've been torn about this man for some time. I don't believe him to be dishonest. Perhaps referring to him as "eccentric" or even "off-the-hook" is accurate, but I never experienced any dishonest or dishonorable acts at his hand. His representation of Obama accuser and homosexual hustler and con artist Larry Sinclair wasn't to my liking, but then, I think I understand what that was about (more on that one day). His attempts to reopen the DC Madam case for a retrial was appropriate as well as brave, it was what gentlemen do under such deplorable circumstances and Sibley is a unique kind of an aristocrat to put it mildly.
Maybe he's Don Quixote, maybe his behavior has been peculiar. Maybe his fixation on his Scottish heritage is archaic. Yes, his behavior has sometimes been peculiar.
However: He was zealous in the defense of Deborah Jeane Palfrey. His constitutionally-based suits against the Supreme Court were principled. His love for his son is clearly genuine, sincere. His humanism is apparent. He has been a threat to established power that's corrupt as well as sadistic and has inflicted itself on the American public via the power of the state. He's not getting rich from charging windmills and I suspect that he's not even remotely how he's been portrayed in the mainstream press, notably by the Washington Post. Indeed, he's drawn to the spotlight like a moth and his being driven from the legal profession could have had merit to it, but that wasn't valid based on his actions in the DC Madam case, albeit that it was probably the main reason for it in the end.
His recent attempts at co-founding a medical marijuana growing space in the nation's capital has my moral support. Other actions by him do not, but what do I know about all of them? What does the press? They don't appear to know very much in any detail. Yes, he "wore a kilt" (traditional, no underwear and he also plays the bagpipes) at his appearance with Larry Sinclair to the National Press Club when his "client" was supposed to present his evidence that he'd snorted coke and had sex with the future presidential candidate in a limousine in Chicago over a decade ago. Sinclair had no evidence. Yet, I cannot come to any conclusions about the man. He's part of our history, for better or worse, and he's terrifically complicated to the extent that he defies one. What would his ancestors like Hiram Sibely be like now? Probably a lot like him, and I leave it at that. He's an anachronism. There are far worse things to be these days.
DC Madam book update
Things are wrapping up: Work is about to commence on a cover design as well as a stand alone website or the book, separate from this blog. At this point, the book is clocking in at 504 pages+ an index and a table of contents. The length is based primarily on the fact that it's packed with primary information related to and from the case from correspondence, the public record, court documents, and more, much more. This is a view into the case that--other than in Montgomery Blair Sibley's Why Just Her--no one has ever seen. I was in a privileged position to experience, view and analyze information that few outside of the defense have ever seen let alone heard of.Postscript: All of the important DC Madam entries from this blog have been extracted and archived. There have been some alarming clusters of activity around the blog and I'd neglected to create copies of some of them. This is no longer the case, and I suspect that some of them faced potential removal in the current political climate. Future editions of the upcoming text could possibly include a DVD-r containing them as well as other primary materials not included in the text from the case.
The primary data isn't so much as explosive as my own own take, my analysis of it. While these are my opinions, they're the opinions of someone intimately involved in the case, therefore, this is a historical accounting as well as opinion and analysis. There will never be a book quite like it, rest assured, and it might just stand as a clear-eyed testament to this troubled era in ways that many of the observers of the case at the time never quite grasped, hindsight being everything of course. You would never want to experience what I and others did. While he's been quite reviled in relation to the case, I can only imagine the hell that counselor Sibley experienced. I was fortunate not to get too close and still got my wings singed.
The prosecution of Deborah Jeane Palfrey was a nightmare case if there ever was one. It was without any legal precedent in American jurisprudence. No one can recall anything like it ever happening, and I doubt there will ever be one quite like it ever again, power nailed that lid shut as thoroughly as possible. Incredible forces were marshaled to shut her down, to prevent more exposure of influence peddling related to defense/intelligence contracting by members of Congress, the executive branch, and yes, even the judiciary who enabled them. As this book should make clear, we're in a lot of trouble as a nation with no hope of actual reform. I believe we're headed in the same direction as the Soviet Union. Perhaps after that there can be a real chance at rebuilding American democracy. That's at least my hope. As it stands, under the current order, there can be no reform and we will continue to push towards the brink of what could be major catastrophe.
Ironically, only government can fix these things. This wasn't just a story about a sex scandal, it was about institutionalized corruption by officeholders who are in fact criminals. The media lied, and lied, and lied, and fulfilled their usual role of protecting power from public scrutiny. Small wonder no one wants to pay to be lied to anymore. More than a few institutions will be put under scrutiny in this account. The picture's not a pretty one and the myth of democracy is revealed as just that. It's one thing to assume, it's another to have your worst fears and cynicism confirmed. Expect a spring release.
Friday, July 29, 2011
More recent "breakthroughs" in the DC Madam account
Things are proceeding nicely, if not endlessly, with the text and the interested should know that a release date within the year is a strong possibility, no later than early 2012. Hey, let's wish us all luck with that one, we're going to need it in the coming months, and that ain't hay, brother--we're in the thick of it.I told Jeane's former counselor, Montgomery Blair Sibely, back in late 2008 that she should have stayed alive since things were going to collapse anyway--she might have been able to walk right out of her cell. This was at the onset of the economic crisis, or rather, when it began affecting the American middle class, the only time it's "important."There have been some "new" developments during the writing, revising, and editing process: most writers and researchers know that sometimes you can go back and look at the information with new eyes, a different context, more information, and so on, and notice something you might have missed the first time around. This wasn't a case of that entirely, since I had some terrifying suspicions during my time doing research for Jeane's defense. They point right back to the CIA and defense-intelligence contractors. Some of it relates to Brent R. Wilkes and Kyle "Dusty" Foggo, former-and-convicted Executive Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and what I consider to be an elephant in the room: their involvement in air operations with the Agency's SAD (Special Activities Division), yes, the section that does what you think they do.They also run the drone program in AFPAK, killing maybe thousands (who's counting?) of people who were never in their sights. Why didn't all of this get more play? You tell me, they must have a Red Bat Phone to all the editors.Frequently, the SAD illegally assassinates human targets that they originally set out to, remarkable, I know. They also sometimes grab people, throw them into business jets they've hired-out (contracted would be a more accurate term, but what the hell), and have them interrogated on dubious grounds in some other nation, more often to manufacture false intelligence to justify reckless foreign policy with molding public opinion in mind. Wilkes's ADCS (Automatic Document Conversion Service) was acting as a front company for SAD, as found in the 2009 "sentencing memorandum appendix" for Foggo. Direct knowledge of the rendition program was some of the "graymail" during his legal proceedings, that he would tell all about it if he got hit with too stiff a sentence.It goes without saying that I believe, and have believed all along, that her case was about Hookergate, that it wasn't separate from it at all. Motions by the prosecution during the proceedings make this patently clear, and The Smoking Gun's Bill Bastone did more than a little tipping-off on the connection between Palfrey and the "Poway Mob," convicted former California Rep. Randy Cunningham, Brent R. Wilkes, Mitchell Wade, and Kyle Foggo, all involved in bribery, influence peddling, abuse of office, corruption, etc., to bilk the public under the banner of national security and the war on terror. Call it what you want, but it's really war profiteering, outright corruption.I believe that Jeane was correct and sincere when she said to me and others that Brent R. Wilkes had called her "frequently" and had "used his own name." I believe he was calling from the Westin Grand, the Watergate Hotel, or from someone else's residence, someone who might come off as innocuous in her phone records. There's something very, very dark here that I believe leads to the rendition program, it wasn't just about Wilkes ferrying Cunningham and Tom Delay around for free, literally on the public's dime. That's illegal too. Now Wilkes is out on appeal and Palfrey's long dead, perhaps safely so in their eyes. This does not mean that I believe she was murdered or that he's ever going to admit to an association with her.The other player in procuring prostitutes to acquire appropriations was Mitchell Wade--he was handling a lot of the procuring for Wilkes, per his testimony in the record, and he was going through Christopher D. Baker's Shirlington Limo who still runs his firm out of a hangar at Ronald Reagan National Airport, Hangar 7, another convenient place--at least before all of the attention--to run a front company and SAD air operations out of. There was a lot of "ferrying" going on, apparently, to the point that Wilkes was handling many of the calls, lining things up himself. And that's when I believe he fucked up and used his own name on the phone when he spoke with Jeane, all due to his exaggerated sense of self-importance at the time. Hey, he was rubbing elbows with the CIA's brass, he was in the big time.Wilkes probably thought that he was impervious, so he walked around with his dick out, just like the Republican lobbyists, former and current GOP incumbents (people like Cunningham), and bureaucratic CIA hacks (like Foggo) he was greasing, greasing to feed on public monies, did. They were all laughing at that very same public with their hooker-and-cigar parties at those two hotels, possibly even at some private homes, playing poker, but really mixing business and pleasure, the hallmark of every fuck up. Wilkes had no prior experience providing aviation services, to anyone, but who really cared? Subordinates who could report it.In 2003, Foggo wrangled Wilkes a bottled water contract for a CIA field station; some accounts state that the water was headed for Iraq, the record steers clear of exactly where, but it appears that it was Germany. Why would they need bottled water exactly? What was wrong with the local fare? Perhaps it was a case of repeated dysentery, but it's a peculiar contract, that "bottled water" one. Again, no prior experience, and the water was simply purchased off-the-shelf, maybe even from a Wal-Mart, then marked-up 60%, as the court's record states in Foggo's case.Consider all of the above the next time the Republicans start yammering about the deficit and the national debt.I've written on some of this before, but there's something here beyond mere profiteering, it's worse, far worse, and the narrowing of the DC Madam scandal to "big names" (everyone but Cunningham, Wade, Foggo and Wilkes) by the mainstream press was both cunning and another pathetic example of their loyalty to established power. They were hiding something very ugly here, it might have had something to do with the rendition program, but it most certainly had to do with defense-intelligence (mis)appropriations, the corrupt contractors who were gaming the system, major league DC lobbyists, political operatives and the seeding of the bureaucracy, and what the decline of an empire looks like.This text will be a testament to these times, at a threshold moment in world history when above and below temporarily change places.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Presenting: A $1,000 wise ass award and prize regarding the DC Madam...
WWW--I noticed recently that former DC Madam counselor Montgomery Blair Sibley's Why Just Her has now been scanned and is in Google books (search engine, you can now search and read the book itself, though it's partial), from a recent and casual search. But this isn't about that, it was just the trigger of my memory over the gaggle of conspiracy nuts and know-it-all wise asses who think they "know the score" on how the DC Madam died. None of them who I have debated with have even read the autopsy and toxicology reports.
In reality, they do know, but won't accept the truth because it doesn't fit into their moronic personal mythology or some notion they got into their heads when they were hanging out with other rednecks and sucking on a joint of a pipe filled with crystal meth. But enough about Alex Constantine...
Here it is: if you can prove in a court of law that the DC Madam was murdered by government operatives, as many nuts are still claiming, you get $1,000 from yours truly. You'll never do it, it will never happen. You want to know why? You don't want to know why, that's the fuckin' problem you dumb asshole. You don't want to know the truth, you don't care, and for you, the believers in her murder, this prize is for you. That's right assholes: fuck you.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Final order in the Palfrey/DC Madam case on abatement and disbursement of her seized assets
Ed.--When Deborah Jeane Palfrey (aka "the DC Madam") took her life on May 1st, 2008, it left open the legal issue of abatement regarding her property and assets that had been seized by the federal government through forfeiture. I believe that Jeane knew this would be the case and that it was a deciding factor in the taking of her own life. I have no regard for the opinions of cranks and conspiracy buffs and other nuts who make the claim that she was murdered by shadowy government operatives.
There is no evidence to support this wild contention, it is at this point inarguable. I'm surprised at how little a fight was put up by the Estate, but then, Preston Burton is the fiduciary of it, and considering how little a fight he put up for the deceased madam, no one important, just a defendant, I guess the concessions made here aren't especially surprising. Why the Palfreys would consider him for running the estate probably has more to do with his own moves to gain it and their desire for a convenient and relatively painless conclusion to things. I can't blame them for this desire.
Note that the margins, page breaks of and formatting of the filing have been altered through transfer to blogger's wonderful layout software. Ahem.
Both Palfrey and the DOJ's prosecutors claimed what I believe was then, and is now, a bald lie: that she only made $2.5 million from her prostitution ring/escort service from 1993-2006. Even figuring-in depreciation/appreciation (lowering or raising of their base value) of the assets--and I haven't done any real number crunching here, though I invite others to do the work for me--the contention is obvious bullshit. The line reading, [my emphasis] "The Parties enter into this Agreement solely for the purpose of compromising potential claims and avoiding the expenses and risks of litigation." seems to bar future civil/wrongful death suits that the Palfreys might have mounted against members of the former federal prosecution team (like Jeffrey A. Taylor) and the federal government itself, maybe even other players.
This is also of interest, though I haven't be able to do a line-by-line reading yet: "...5. The United States agrees to release, settle, cancel, discharge and acknowledge to be fully satisfied, any and all claims, liens, demands, obligations, rights, and causes of action of whatever kind, nature, or description whatsoever, whether known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, reported or unreported, which they might have against...," which I think means that they think there's more money out there (as do I), but it's OK for Burton and Orrick to go globetrotting to look for them if they're out there and to keep and/or disburse them. Burton is a partner of the firm, an international one that employs thousands globally, a "megafirm" in fact.
Below is the entire twelve-page ruling from yesterday by the questionable former FISA court Judge, James Robertson...
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) No. 1:06-cv-01710-JR
)
803 CAPITOL STREET, etc., et al., )
Defendants. )
__________________________________________)
)
DEBORAH JEANE PALFREY (ESTATE OF), )
and )
BLANCHE PALFREY, )
Claimants. )CONCLUDING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
COMES NOW, plaintiff, the United States of America, by the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, and claimants Deborah Jeane Palfrey (through the Estate of Deborah Jeane Palfrey, hereinafter the “Palfrey Estate”) and Ms. Blanche Palfrey (acting both individually and on behalf of the Palfrey Estate), by their attorney, Mr. Preston Burton, Esq. (collectively, hereinafter, “the parties”), respectfully to notify this Court that the parties have made a Concluding Settlement Agreement (“Agreement”). This agreement disposes of all remaining claims, issues, and litigation in this civil forfeiture action in rem, case number 1:06-cv-01710-JR. In summary, the parties have agreed to settle this action without further litigation by dividing equally the net proceeds from the liquidation and sale of the defendant properties, after accounting for certain earlier Court-authorized payments. With this Concluding Settlement Agreement, the parties respectfully submit a proposed Final Order Of Forfeiture And Dismissal, which they ask the Court to issue. Doing so will conclude this action in its entirety so that the Court may dismiss it. In support whereof, the parties
respectfully state as follows:
WHEREAS, Plaintiff seized certain assets that had been controlled by Deborah Jeane Palfrey
Case 1:06-cv-01710-JR Document 113 Filed 03/12/10 Page 1 of 12
-2-
before her demise, which the government asserted were subject to forfeiture under federal law;
WHEREAS, Plaintiff thereafter brought this civil forfeiture action in rem in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, United States v. 803 Capitol Street, etc., et al., No. 1:06-cv-01710-JR, against the seized properties (the “defendant properties”);
WHEREAS, Ms. Deborah Jeane Palfrey (and after her demise, the Estate of Deborah Jeane (“the Palfrey Estate”)) and Ms. Blanche Palfrey (acting both individually and on behalf of the Palfrey Estate), have filed claims in this case (“claimants”) and have asserted, inter alia, that certain of the seized properties are not subject to forfeiture;
WHEREAS, pursuant to an Order dated June 22, 2007, which issued in a related and now abated criminal case in this Court, United States v. Deborah Jeane Palfrey, etc., No. 1:07-cr-00046- JR, the defendant property 1441 Vaquero Glen, Escondido, California 92026, was sold, and the net proceeds totaled $316,296.16;
WHEREAS, pursuant to an Order dated March 13, 2009, in this case, No. 1:06-cv-01710-JR, the defendant property 803 Capital Street, Vallejo California 94590, was sold, and the net proceeds totaled $161,006.86;
WHEREAS, pursuant to an Order dated September 21, 2009, in this case, No. 1:06-cv- 01710-JR, the defendant property of funds held in Charles Schwab investment accounts XXXX-318, XXXX-3186 and XXXX-3192, was liquidated, and the net proceeds totaled $582,097.93; WHEREAS, defendant assets held in Wells Fargo accounts 005-XXXXXXX and 6952- XXXXXX totaled $11,396.35;
WHEREAS, pursuant to an Order dated September 21, 2009, in this case, No. 1:06-cv- 01710-JR, the defendant property described as 413 Gold Krugerrands and Other Gold and Silver Coins (the “defendant coins”) was sold at auction on January 13, 2010, and the net proceeds totaled
Case 1:06-cv-01710-JR Document 113 Filed 03/12/10 Page 2 of 12
-3-
$586,133.08
WHEREAS, pursuant to an Order dated October 1, 2009, in this case, No. 1:06-cv-01710-JR, approving a Partial Settlement Agreement with Montgomery Blair Sibley, Mr. Sibley received a payment of $66,224.00 from funds derived from the defendant properties in exchange for a full settlement of any and all of his claims, known or unknown, against the defendant properties, the Palfrey Estate, and Blanche Palfrey (both individually and in her capacity as Executor of the Palfrey Estate);
WHEREAS, pursuant to an Order dated November 19, 2009, in this case, No. 1:06-cv- 01710-JR, approving a Partial Settlement Agreement with The Innocence Project, Inc., The Innocence Project, Inc., received a payment of $89,000.00 from funds derived from the defendant properties in exchange for a full settlement of any potential claims against the defendant properties, the Palfrey Estate, Blanche Palfrey (both individually and in her capacity as Executor of the Palfrey Estate), and any other property or asset formerly owned by Deborah Jeane Palfrey; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to enter into this Agreement in order to resolve this matter and thereby avoid the expense of litigation, the parties therefore agree and stipulate as follows. First, the parties agree that, after the sales and payments to The Innocence Project, Inc., and to Montgomery Blair Sibley recounted above, the net proceeds from the sale or liquidation of the defendant properties is $1,501,706.38.
Second, the parties have agreed to divide equally the net proceeds from the sale or
liquidation of the defendant properties Therefore, to resolve this litigation completely, the parties agree to the following:
I. Payment to the Estate of Deborah Jeane Palfrey and Blanche Palfrey, as an individual and in her capacity as Executor of the Estate of Deborah Jeane Palfrey:
Case 1:06-cv-01710-JR Document 113 Filed 03/12/10 Page 3 of 12
-4-
1. The United States consents to entry of the proposed Final Order Of Forfeiture And
Dismissal directing the United States Internal Revenue Service to release to Blanche Palfrey, in her individual capacity, a total of $75,000.00 (seventy-five thousand dollars and no cents), by electronic funds transfer to Account Number XXXXXXXX2849 at Bank of America, Tarpon Springs, Florida (ABA Route XXXXXXXXX) within thirty-five (35) days of the Court’s issuance of the Final Order Of Forfeiture And Dismissal. Blanche Palfrey understands that she will assume full responsibility for any and all tax consequences of receipt of this payment.
2. The United States consents to entry of the proposed Final Order Of Forfeiture And
Dismissal directing the United States Internal Revenue Service to release to the Estate of Deborah Jeane Palfrey a total of $675,853.19 (six hundred seventy-five thousand, eighthundred fifty-three dollars and nineteen cents), by electronic funds transfer to Sideman & Bancroft LLP IOLTA Account, Account Number XXXXXXXXXX, held at Union Bank of California, Los Angeles, California (ABA Route 122000496), for credit to client-matter number 10936 within seventy (70) days of the Court’s issuance of the Final Order Of Forfeiture And Dismissal. It is agreed by the parties that the payment to the Palfrey Estate is funded by the proceeds of the sale of the defendant properties at 803 Capitol Street and 1441 Vaquero Glen and the sale of the defendant coins. The Palfrey Estate understands that it will assume full responsibility for any and all tax consequences of receipt of this payment.
II. Forfeiture to the United States:
3. The parties agree that a basis for the defendant properties’ forfeiture has been
established in the record as a matter of fact and of law. The Palfrey claimants consent to the entry of the proposed Final Order Of Forfeiture And Dismissal, which adjudges and decrees the forfeiture to the plaintiff United States of the balance of the net proceeds from the sale or liquidation of defendant properties as reduced by the payments of $75,000 and $675,853.19 to Blanche Palfrey. Thus, the parties ask the Court to issue the proposed Final Order Of Forfeiture And Dismissal declaring forfeit to the United States $750,853.19 (seven hundred fifty thousand, eight hundred fifty-three dollars and nineteen cents), plus any interest or other such funds attributable to their deposit in any account during the pendency
of this civil forfeiture action in rem.
III. The Palfrey Parties Consent to Release of All Claims Against the United States:
4. Upon payment of the amounts stated in Paragraphs 1-2 above, the Palfrey Estate and Blanche Palfrey (both individually and in her capacity as Executor of the Palfrey Estate (“Palfrey Parties”), agree to release, settle, cancel, discharge, and acknowledge to be fully satisfied, any and all claims, liens, demands, obligations, rights, and causes of action of whatever kind, nature, or description whatsoever, whether known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, reported or unreported, which they might have against the United States arising from the assets currently subject to forfeiture in this matter; now or hereafter, arising out of, or by reason of, or in any manner connected with the allegations set forth in this case, 06-cv-1710-JR, and in the related and now abated criminal case, United States v. Deborah
Case 1:06-cv-01710-JR Document 113 Filed 03/12/10 Page 4 of 12
-5-
Jeane Palfrey, etc., Case No. 1:07-cr-0046-JR, also in this Court.
IV. The United States Consents to Release of All Claims Against the Defendant Properties and Against the Palfrey Parties:
5. The United States agrees to release, settle, cancel, discharge and acknowledge to be fully satisfied, any and all claims, liens, demands, obligations, rights, and causes of action of whatever kind, nature, or description whatsoever, whether known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, reported or unreported, which they might have against:
(a) the assets currently subject to forfeiture in this matter;
(b) the Palfrey Estate;
(c) Blanche Palfrey (both individually and in her capacity as Executor of the Palfrey
Estate, including, with respect to the Palfrey parties, their Executors or
Administrators and any successors, assigns, agents, or attorneys acting on their
behalf); and,
(d) any other property or asset formerly owned or controlled by Deborah Jeane
Palfrey,
now or hereafter, arising out of, or by reason of, or in any manner connected with the
allegations set forth in this case number 06-cv-1710-JR, or in the related and now abated Criminal Action, United States v. Deborah Jeane Palfrey, etc., No. 1:07-cr-0046-JR, or giving rise to such actions, and not to assert, or if asserted to withdraw, claims or challenges in this forfeiture action, No. 06-cv-1710-JR, and claims or challenges in any court and concerning properties acquired by Deborah Jeane Palfrey, including, but not limited to, Case No. P43192, pending in Solano County, California, and case number 2008-CP-001782-O, pending in Orange County, Florida.
General Provisions
6. This Agreement shall not constitute an admission of liability or fault on the part of the Parties or their past or present agents, employees, representatives, or officers. The Parties enter into this Agreement solely for the purpose of compromising potential claims and avoiding the expenses and risks of litigation.
7. The Parties agree that each shall bear its own court costs, legal expenses, and attorney’s fees incurred in relation to this litigation and related to the facts underlying it.
8. Each of the Parties to this Agreement has participated in the drafting and negotiation of this Agreement. For all purposes, this Agreement shall be deemed to have been drafted jointly by the
Case 1:06-cv-01710-JR Document 113 Filed 03/12/10 Page 5 of 12
-6-
Parties.
9. Each of the Parties to this Agreement has carefully read this Agreement and, after
consultation with their respective legal counsel, as applicable, the Parties to this Agreement fully understand this Agreement and sign it as a voluntary act.
10. The persons signing this Agreement represent and warrant by their signatures that they have authority to sign this Agreement on behalf of the individuals or entities for whom they are
purporting to sign.
11. It is contemplated that this Agreement may be executed in several counterparts. This Agreement may be executed on facsimile copies and in counterparts, each of which shall be provided to counsel for the United States. Facsimiles of signatures, should they be provided to the United States, shall constitute acceptable, binding signatures for purposes of this Agreement. Upon its receipt of executed counterpart signature pages, the United States may treat the executed counterparts as one merged document that the United States may execute, and may then file, along with a consistent proposed order, electronically with the Court.
12. No term or provision of this Agreement may be varied, changed, modified, waived, or terminated, except by an instrument in writing signed by the party against whom the enforcement of such alteration is sought.
13. This Agreement shall be governed and construed by the laws of the District of Columbia.
* * *
WHEREFORE, as set forth in the thirteen (13) enumerated paragraphs above, the Parties to this Concluding Settlement Agreement stipulate that this civil forfeiture action should be resolved fully as to the United States, the Estate of Deborah Jeane Palfrey, and Blanche Palfrey (both individually and in her capacity as Executor of the Estate of Deborah Jeane Palfrey), as set forth
Case 1:06-cv-01710-JR Document 113 Filed 03/12/10 Page 6 of 12
-7-
herein, and the parties request the Court to enter the attached proposed FINAL ORDER OF FORFEITURE AND DISMISSAL approving this Concluding Settlement Agreement and authorizing the disbursement agreed to herein.
CONCLUDING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ACCEPTED AND ORDER REQUESTED:
1. For Plaintiff (the United States) in District of DC Action 06-cv-1710-JR:
Date: March 11, 2010 /s/ Ronald C. Machen Jr
RONALD C. MACHEN Jr, D.C. Bar No. 447889
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
/s/ Deborah L. Connor
DEBORAH L. CONNOR, D.C. Bar No. 452414
Assistant United States Attorney
/s/ Barry Wiegand
BARRY WIEGAND, D.C. Bar No. 424288
Assistant United States Attorney
Criminal Division, Asset Forfeiture Unit
555 Fourth Street, N.W., Fourth Floor
Washington, D.C. 20530
(202) 307-0299
William.B.Wiegand@U SDoJ.Gov
2. For claimants Deborah Jeane Palfrey’s Estate and Blanche Palfrey (the Palfrey parties):
/s/Blanche Palfrey
BLANCHE PALFREY
Date: March 11, 2010 /s/ Preston Burton
PRESTON BURTON, D.C. Bar No. 426378
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
Columbia Center
1152 15th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20005-1706
Copies bearing the individual signatures of the persons listed above are in plaintiff’s possession.
Case 1:06-cv-01710-JR Document 113 Filed 03/12/10 Page 7 of 12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) No. 1:06-cv-01710-JR
)
803 CAPITOL STREET, etc., et al., )
Defendants. )
__________________________________________)
)
DEBORAH JEANE PALFREY’S ESTATE, )
and )
BLANCHE PALFREY, )
Claimants. )
FINAL ORDER OF FORFEITURE AND DISMISSAL
On October 3, 2006, a Verified Complaint For Forfeiture In Rem was filed by plaintiff, the United States of America. Plaintiff filed an Amended Verified Complaint on November 22, 2006, seeking to forfeit various defendant properties, including: real property, funds, and precious metal coins. Plaintiff sought to enforce the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(A), which provides for the forfeiture of any property involved in a transaction or attempted transaction in violation of 18. U.S.C. §§ 1956 and 1960, or any property traceable to such property. Plaintiff also sought to enforce the provisions of 18. U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C), which provides for the forfeiture of property which constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to a violation of any offense constituting “specified unlawful activity” or a conspiracy to commit such offense. Based upon a full review of the record and upon the stipulation of the parties, the Court finds:
(1) the Amended Complaint alleges a proper basis in fact and in law for forfeiture;
(2) on about November 19, 2006, claimant Deborah Jeane Palfrey filed a verified claim to the defendant properties, which claim is now maintained by her Estate;
(3) on about June 12, 2008, claimant Blanche Palfrey filed a verified claim to the defendant
Case 1:06-cv-01710-JR Document 113 Filed 03/12/10 Page 8 of 12
-2-
properties;
(4) no other person has submitted a claim with respect to the defendant properties within the time permitted by 18 U.S.C. § 983(a)(4)(a) and Rule G of the Supplemental Rules For Admiralty Or Maritime Claims And Asset Forfeiture Actions;
(5) on March 4, 2010, plaintiff and claimants settled the contested issues among them, and submitted to the Court a written Concluding Settlement Agreement, in which the parties requested the Court to approve and accept the Concluding Settlement Agreement and to issue this Final Order Of Forfeiture And Dismissal; and,
(6) pursuant to the terms of the Concluding Settlement Agreement, the parties have agreed, inter alia, as follows:
1. The United States consents to entry of the proposed Final Order Of Forfeiture And
Dismissal directing the United States Internal Revenue Service to release to Blanche Palfrey, in her individual capacity, a total of $75,000.00 (seventy-five thousand dollars and no cents), by electronic funds transfer to Account Number XXXXXXXXXXXX at Bank of America, Tarpon Springs, Florida (ABA Route XXXXXXXXX) within thirty-five (35) days of the Court’s issuance of the Final Order Of Forfeiture And Dismissal. Blanche Palfrey understands that she will assume full responsibility for any and all tax consequences of receipt of this payment.
2. The United States consents to entry of the proposed Final Order Of Forfeiture And
Dismissal directing the United States Internal Revenue Service to release to the Estate of Deborah Jeane Palfrey a total of $675,853.19 (six hundred seventy-five thousand, eight hundred fifty-three dollars and nineteen cents), by electronic funds transfer to Sideman & Bancroft LLP IOLTA Account, Account Number XXXXXXXXXX, held at Union Bank of California, Los Angeles, California (ABA Route XXXXXXXXX), for credit to client-matter number XXXXX within seventy (70) days of the Court’s issuance of the Final Order Of Forfeiture And Dismissal. It is agreed by the parties that the payment to the Palfrey Estate is funded by the proceeds of the sale of the defendant properties at 803 Capitol Street and 1441 Vaquero Glen and the sale of the defendant coins. The Palfrey Estate understands that it will assume full responsibility for any and all tax consequences of receipt of this payment.
II. Forfeiture to the United States:
3. The parties agree that a basis for the defendant properties’ forfeiture has been
established in the record as a matter of fact and of law. The Palfrey claimants consent to
Case 1:06-cv-01710-JR Document 113 Filed 03/12/10 Page 9 of 12
-3-
the entry of the proposed Final Order Of Forfeiture And Dismissal, which adjudges and decrees the forfeiture to the plaintiff United States of the balance of the net proceeds from the sale or liquidation of defendant properties as reduced by the payments of $75,000 and $675,853.19 to Blanche Palfrey. Thus, the parties ask the Court to issue the proposed Final Order Of Forfeiture And Dismissal declaring forfeit to the United States $750,853.19 (seven hundred fifty thousand, eight hundred fifty-three dollars and nineteen cents), plus any interest or other such funds attributable to their deposit in any account during the pendency of this civil forfeiture action in rem.
III. The Palfrey Parties Consent to Release of All Claims Against the United States:
4. Upon payment of the amounts stated in Paragraphs 1-2 above, the Palfrey Estate and Blanche Palfrey (both individually and in her capacity as Executor of the Palfrey Estate (“Palfrey Parties”), agree to release, settle, cancel, discharge, and acknowledge to be fully satisfied, any and all claims, liens, demands, obligations, rights, and causes of action of whatever kind, nature, or description whatsoever, whether known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, reported or unreported, which they might have against the United States arising from the assets currently subject to forfeiture in this matter; now or hereafter, arising out of, or by reason of, or in any manner connected with the allegations set forth in this case, 06-cv-1710-JR, and in the related and now abated criminal case, United States v. Deborah Jeane Palfrey, etc., Case No. 1:07-cr-0046-JR, also in this Court.
IV. The United States Consents to Release of All Claims Against the Defendant Properties and Against the Palfrey Parties:
5. The United States agrees to release, settle, cancel, discharge and acknowledge to be fully satisfied, any and all claims, liens, demands, obligations, rights, and causes of action of whatever kind, nature, or description whatsoever, whether known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, reported or unreported, which they might have against:
(a) the assets currently subject to forfeiture in this matter;
(b) the Palfrey Estate;
(c) Blanche Palfrey (both individually and in her capacity as Executor of the Palfrey
Estate, including, with respect to the Palfrey parties, their Executors or
Administrators and any successors, assigns, agents, or attorneys acting on their
behalf); and,
(d) any other property or asset formerly owned or controlled by Deborah Jeane
Palfrey,
now or hereafter, arising out of, or by reason of, or in any manner connected with the
allegations set forth in this case number 06-cv-1710-JR, or in the related and now abated Criminal Action, United States v. Deborah Jeane Palfrey, etc., No. 1:07-cr-0046-JR, or giving rise to such actions, and not to assert, or if asserted to withdraw, claims or challenges in this forfeiture action, No. 06-cv-1710-JR, and claims or challenges in any court and concerning properties acquired by Deborah Jeane Palfrey, including, but not limited to, Case
Case 1:06-cv-01710-JR Document 113 Filed 03/12/10 Page 10 of 12
-4-
No. P43192, pending in Solano County, California, and case number 2008-CP-001782-O, pending in Orange County, Florida.
General Provisions
6. This Agreement shall not constitute an admission of liability or fault on the part of the Parties or their past or present agents, employees, representatives, or officers. The Parties enter into this Agreement solely for the purpose of compromising potential claims and avoiding the expenses and risks of litigation.
7. The Parties agree that each shall bear its own court costs, legal expenses, and attorney’s fees incurred in relation to this litigation and related to the facts underlying it.
NOW, THEREFORE, on the filing by the parties of the Concluding Settlement Agreement, which the Court hereby approves and orders to be carried out, and upon the request of the parties for the issuance of this Final Order Of Forfeiture And Dismissal, it is hereby
ORDERED, that, within thirty-five (35) days of the issuance of this Final Order Of
Forfeiture And Dismissal, the United States Internal Revenue Service shall release to Blanche Palfrey, in her individual capacity, a total of $75,000.00 (seventy-five thousand dollars and no cents), by electronic funds transfer to Account Number XXXXXXXXXXXX at Bank of America, Tarpon Springs, Florida (ABA Route XXXXXXXXX); and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that within seventy (70) days from the entry of this Final Order Of Forfeiture And Dismissal, the United States Internal Revenue Service shall release to release to the Estate of Deborah Jeane Palfrey a total of $675,853.19 (six hundred seventy-five thousand, eight hundred
fifty-three dollars and nineteen cents), by electronic funds transfer to Sideman & Bancroft LLP IOLTA Account, Account Number XXXXXXXXXX, held at Union Bank of California, Los Angeles, California (ABA Route XXXXXXXXX), for credit to client-matter number XXXXX. The
Case 1:06-cv-01710-JR Document 113 Filed 03/12/10 Page 11 of 12
-5-
parties have agreed that the payment to the Palfrey Estate is funded by the proceeds of the sale of the defendant properties at 803 Capitol Street and 1441 Vaquero Glen and the sale of the defendant coins; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that the balance of the defendant properties, $750,853.19 (seven hundred fifty thousand, eight hundred fifty-three dollars and nineteen cents), including any interest or other such funds attributable to them, is hereby adjudged and decreed forfeited to plaintiff United States of America, and title to the balance of the defendant properties hereby is vested in the United States of America, and no other, to be disposed of in accordance with law; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that the above-captioned case is DISMISSED, except that the Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the provisions of the Stipulated Settlement; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that the Clerk is hereby directed to send three (4) certified copies of this Order to plaintiff’s counsel of record.
______________________________________________
JAMES ROBERTSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
________________
Date
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)