• mobtalkradioshow


There are days, I cannot believe the utter nonsense that comes across my desk. First of all, I have always said as I will always say, if you got it, bring it. If you gotta case, prosecute it. Don't waste trees printing bullshit allegations, trying to force a judge to render a stiffer sentence on a guy because you think it went this way or that. Allegations are simply that.

If you read any sentencing report, usually your going to read about what the government alleged happened. Alleging and proving are two different things. When it comes to a defendant, at sentencing, they can bring up your past. They can bring up past allegations and your past crimes. What's funny to me specifically, and I will make a few references here to point out some facts, is that the government rarely proves the extracurricular activities.

At Joey Merlino's sentencing, the government in it's report mentions Merlino's past convictions. I understand that, it's happened to me, some of you and a million others. They use your past against you. We could use a pretty valid argument against that, but we will save that for another day. The issue I take, is that the government can use any allegation levied against you, albeit associates, childhood friends, and relatives, and anything they have done. It's nonsense. In Merlino's case, they brought up murder allegations, which those allegations were long over, as Merlino and others were acquitted of those charges. If you cannot retry someone whose acquitted of a crime, then how can you justifiably use those acquittals or allegations never proven against someone in an attempt to characterize them a certain way? It's not justifiable, but since when does the government justified?

I read a sentencing report yesterday and I'd rather not mention the people mentioned, out of respect, and because all the levied allegations were so pointless and vulgar it doesn't bare repeating. I will say this. They way they structured their "FACTS," mentioning a lot of people, making huge assertions meant to bring attention to a defendants past and his current problems is disgusting. They talk like it's factual, and they lay it out as if it's one major conspiracy. The fact is, if half the nonsense they vomit in those papers was accurate wouldn't these "guys" all be indicted? They have all the facts right? Why is there not an indictment? It's a little disgusting to see all these "allegations," weaved into a poetic assassination of people's character. This is what the feds do.

In this case, I can tell you this. The defendant never uttered a word, even if journalists attempted to label him a rat not a week after he was arrested. They knew it was bullshit and tried to tongue and cheek it otherwise, and when I called them out as liars, they quickly retracted it. Do you work for the fucking feds? Last I checked you didn't assume and write assumptions about people. The defendant also slammed them, and corrected them about there OUT RIGHT LIES about him. These two journalists recently covered the resolution to the case, and had to insert a few lines about someone whose done NOTHING WRONG, who has continually been harassed by the FBI non stop and has nothing to do with this case, even if the feds wanna make allegations. Either the FBI is slow mentally down in Philadelphia, or they are starving for crumbs. I have never seen a pack of jerk offs with cameras been so trigger happy to video tape and photo guys going to church, to the deli, or to the gas station in my life. This is NOT 1920 Chicago for the love of God.

What a sentencing report of a defendant has to do with ten other people, not indicted, not charged, blows my mind. Maybe the defendant should be charged and he was for his own crimes and responsibilities. Bringing up ten others, is meant to inflame the judge to punish the defendant even harder. It's bullshit. It's like saying because I knew Jeffery Dahmer, somehow I gotta be guilty of something. This is the same mentality the feds have always had. These guys watch too many mob movies for their own good.

At the end of the day, I can gripe about the things I think are unjust and unfair, but think about what people go through. A guy does some dumb shit, gets caught, and because you know him from the neighborhood, or from school, it automatically lops you in with him, it allows the government the ability to stalk and harass and make incendiary remarks which aren't proven or even borderline factual. To sit outside a guys house with his hand in a bag of cheese doodles and a smut magazine on the seat next to him, staring at a guys home in the middle of the night, is creepy. Guys have been arrested for less, but because it's the government, it's allowed. I just think, if your gonna make circus allegations, prove them. Why they are allowed to castigate a defendant because of his friends, or to name other people not associated in the case, is so low, and so repulsive. I'm waiting for a judge to have balls for once and say you know, this doesn't have anything to do with why we are here, and if you have assertions or allegations that include possible other defendants, then please, file charges or shut the fuck up. It's not fair to the defendant, those named, and their families. The stories I could put out about FBI harassment and stalking would shock you. I just feel that if you're gonna sentence anyone, if allegations are that, they shouldn't even be brought up. If someone is charged and convicted and asking for a downward departure yet their past says or dictates otherwise, fine. I get that. But to lop people in a group and slam allegations at others, which is NOT PROVEN, ONLY SUGGESTED, and is used to fuel a defendants time behind the wall, it just doesn't sit right with me, but then again, since when does anything the feds do sit right with me.

74 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All