Ya gland 3121-22

[Dr031718]

Ronnie G: Government Court Filing Backs Me Up; Rescind My Guilty Plea

Gang Land Exclusive!Ronald GiallanzoSay this for Bonanno wiseguy Ronald (Ronnie G) Giallanzo, the man is sticking to his guns.

His former attorney submitted an affidavit against him on behalf of the Brooklyn U.S. Attorney's office saying his guilty plea was valid. But Giallanzo says the details in the affidavit back up his claim that his guilty plea should be rescinded. That's because his ex-lawyer confirms that his prosecutor made a promise during a secret meeting that coerced him to change his mind and plead guilty rather than go to trial. And he's willing to talk about it on the witness stand.

In a court filing, Giallanzo has asked Judge Dora Irizarry to void his March 19, 2018 guilty plea to racketeering. He argues that a direct quote in the affidavit stating that if he pleaded guilty the prosecutor promised to "use her best efforts to ensure that Mr. Giallanzo would be placed in a facility in or close to the New York area" is government "evidence" that "supports" his position.

Elizabeth MacedonioEleven days earlier, on March 8, according to all accounts, Giallanzo had refused to plead guilty in a scheduled court session as then-lawyer Elizabeth Macedonio had agreed he would. Minutes later, Ronnie G had a "secret meeting" that Macedonio arranged with prosecutor Lindsay Gerdes and an FBI agent at which Gerdes made him a promise concerning where he would serve his sentence.

Ronnie G's current attorneys, Brendan White and Anthony DiPietro, argue that since Macedonio's account of the secret session is "entirely consistent with the allegations" in the affidavits that Giallanzo and his wife Elizabeth have submitted about the reason he pleaded guilty, Irizarry should grant his motion "in all respects."

The lawyers ripped prosecutor Margaret Schierberl for "consign(ing) to a footnote" Giallanzo's claim that he "relied on the Government's representation that he would be housed somewhere near New York if he agreed to plead guilty" because he had stated in court that he received no promises other than those in his plea agreement.

Lindsay GerdesThat aspect of the government's promise, the lawyers wrote, "was particularly insidious" because it required Giallanzo "to put his faith in the prosecutor fulfilling her end of the bargain not only after the plea stage, but after the sentencing and imposition of the judgment" by keeping his mouth shut about it when he pleaded guilty.

That belief by Giallanzo is clear, they wrote, in the affidavits Ronnie G and his wife filed with the Court in which they state that "they asked Macedonio" several times "to find out why it was taking so long" for Ronnie G to be designated to a local facility after he was sentenced.

"Moreover," the lawyers wrote, "both the prosecutor and defense counsel had an affirmative duty to advise the Court of the meeting in the holding cell, the nature of the discussion that occurred there, and specifically that Mr. Giallanzo had agreed to plead guilty in reliance on the off-the-record promise regarding his designation."

Judge Dora IrizarryThe transcript of Giallanzo's guilty plea, "makes it clear," they wrote, "that none of the attorneys alerted the Court about the meeting or the prosecutor's representation to Mr. Giallanzo."

The "central allegation" by Mr. and Mrs. Giallanzo that prosecutor Gerdes made a promise to Ronnie G is not only corroborated by Macedonio and by prior affidavits of defense lawyers Gerald McMahon and Joseph DiBenedetto, it is not contradicted by prosecutor Gerdes or the FBI agent who met with Ronnie G, they wrote.

"Conspicuously absent from the Government's opposing papers," the lawyers wrote, "is any statement — sworn or otherwise — from the prosecutor or case agent who went to the holding cell and spoke" with Giallanzo and Macedonio. There is no affidavit, they wrote, "disputing that the prosecutor made a promise to induce Mr. Giallanzo to plead guilty."

Gerald McMahonThe government's filing "supports" Giallanzo's position that Gerdes "did in fact" tell him "that she would use best efforts to ensure that he would remain close to New York," the lawyers wrote. "It is clear," they wrote, "that there was a promise on the part of the prosecutor" that was made "to induce Mr. Giallanzo to plead guilty, by offering to resolve the principal stumbling block in the negotiation."

"And while there may be minor variations between" the memories of Giallanzo and Macedonio "regarding the precise language used," the lawyers wrote, "it was clear that Mr. Giallanzo held a genuine belief that the prosecutor could see to it that he remained in the New York City area."

Based on the "uncontradicted, and thoroughly corroborated evidence that a promise was made," they wrote, and because it is clear that "the promise was made in order to induce him to plead guilty," the lawyers argued, the Court should vacate Giallanzo's guilty plea.

And if the Court has any doubt about the circumstances surrounding the promise that was made, the lawyers asked Judge Irizarry to schedule a full blown hearing to find out if Ronnie G received an "unfulfilled promise" that was a "violation of due process that requires that Mr. Giallanzo be permitted to withdraw his guilty plea."

Anthony DiPietroShe could weigh the direct testimony, and cross examination, of Giallanzo, his wife, Macedonio, Gerdes, the FBI agent who was at the secret meeting, as well as any "other relevant witnesses" the judge deemed necessary in order to decide whether Giallanzo's "decision to plead guilty was in fact voluntary."

Gerdes "could be asked about how (the meeting) came about," they wrote, as well as "what her expectations were in having that meeting, what her understanding was regarding his conditions for pleading guilty, and most importantly, what exactly she said to Mr. Giallanzo in the hopes of getting him to agree to plead guilty."

The prosecutor could also testify if she actually had "any ability to influence or arrange" designations for inmates and "under what circumstances."

"Finally," wrote White and DiPietro, "the Court would be able to evaluate the overall coercive effect of the highly unusual discussion in the holding cell, and consider the combination of the factors — including Mr. Giallanzo's allegations, unaddressed by the Government — that the prosecutor told him he should take the deal because his attorney had worked hard for him."

The Waterfront Watchdog, Hobbled By A Knee Injury, Is Still On Guard

Joseph SanzariFour days after the U.S. Supreme Court blocked New Jersey from overseeing and policing the state's piers and loading docks, it was supposed to be business as usual for the Waterfront Commission on Monday. But at the first meeting of the 69-year-old bi-state waterfront watchdog panel since the SCOTUS ruling, the Garden State's newly appointed representative was a no show.

The absence of Joseph Sanzari, a businessman pal of Harold Daggett, the International Longshoremen's Association president who has been the main antagonist against the Commission for more than a decade, left the Commission unable to move a few major items on its agenda.

It was not an unreasonable assumption that Sanzari's absence was part of a New Jersey-ILA based bid to block the Waterfront Commission from maintaining its oversight of the New Jersey waterfront. After all, Sanzari was the keynote speaker at the 2019 ILA convention that elected Daggett to his third four-year-term as ILA president.

But that was not the case. Sanzari was merely under the weather following knee surgery, according to Joy-Michele Johnson, a senior counsel for Governor Murphy.

Harold Daggett"He is not feeling well right now," Johnson told the Commission's General Counsel Phoebe Sorial. "He is currently unavailable due to a major surgery that he underwent last week," said Johnson, who asked for "everyone's patience" until Sanzari was available to resume his role as New Jersey's Commissioner on the agency.

Despite Sanzari's absence, Sorial tentatively approved the controller's report on cash the agency currently has available in its "reserve fund" — $14.9 million, which is $2.1 million more than it had a year ago — and the $584,000 in forfeited funds the agency has and can use only in other investigations, since Sanzari had received copies of the reports and hadn't objected to them.

Before the Commission moved into executive session to discuss ongoing investigations, executive director Walter Arsenault tabled the proposed rejections for longshoremen's jobs by two applicants who were deemed unfit by an Administrative Law Judge. They were put over until the Commission's April 11 meeting because those recommendations, like all major decisions, have to be approved by the Commissioners of both states.

Joy JohnsonThe Commission's "reserve fund," as well as the operating fund it uses to pay the salaries and benefit costs of its employees, who include about 30 detectives and cops from both states, is funded through quarterly payments from waterfront employers that can be assessed up to 2% of the salaries they pay their longshore workers.

The additional $2.1 million in its "reserve fund" is due to the greater volume of cargo that has arrived at the port in the last year, and the increased salaries that have been paid to get it unloaded and distributed. That fund is a hedge against known liabilities, like health benefits and other costs for pensioners, as well as un-foreseen risks like COVID, strikes or lockouts that would decrease the quarterly assessment receipts.

The money that waterfront employers pay to fund the Waterfront Commission has long been a major bone of contention of the New York Shipping Association (NYSA,) which argued in a March 4 letter to the Commission that the NYSA did not have to pay an assessment in 2022, even if New Jersey hadn't decided to withdraw from the Commission.

Phoebe SorialIn that letter, sent weeks before the SCOTUS blocked New Jersey's withdrawal, NYSA president John Nardi stated that the Commission had "a reserve (fund) far in excess of that permitted" by the Waterfront Commission Act which requires the reserve fund not to exceed "ten percent of the total of all other items of expenditure." As a result, he argued, the Commission was "without authority to levy assessments."

Last week's SCOTUS ruling makes it clear that the status quo is in force, so the quarterly assessment payment is due on April 15.

There is no question though that due to an estimated 15% increase in the volume of cargo that has come into the port in the last two years, and the commensurate greater salaries generated by the increased workload, the Commission's operating fund – as well as its reserve fund – have ballooned in recent years.

In the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2020, after the Commission paid all its bills, including $10.9 million in salaries and benefit costs of its employees, there was still $3.5 million in the Commission's coffers. The operating fund now stands at about $13.5 million.

John NardiThe 2021 fiscal year audit isn't available, but increased worker salaries due to the growing volume of cargo that has been coming and going through the Port of New York and New Jersey is expected to lower the assessment rate – it was 1.8% in 2020 – that waterfront employers are dunned each year. It's not the dramatic change that the NYSA and the ILA have been hoping for on March 4, but it's something.

Meanwhile, the governors of both states have voiced optimism that they will prevail in the Supreme Court, but at this point, the odds definitely favor New York.

New Jersey did not win its reversal of the Newark Federal Judge's decision on substantive grounds, but a technical one, that was overcome when New York filed its suit. And by granting a preliminary injunction against New Jersey, SCOTUS, which had digested the entire record of that case, and had read more than 300 pages of arguments and exhibits in the new case, the Court indicated that it was likely that New York would succeed on the merits when all is said and done.

Hard-Nosed Fed Finds Soft Solution For Pain-Wracked Ex-Con

Scott HartmanPeople are puffing away on New York streets these days, but Scott Hartman, a hard-nosed ex-mob prosecutor who is now a supervisor for the Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office, refused last month to let a former inmate on supervised release use cannabis to cope with his chronic pain. The Reason? It's still a federal crime. But in the interest of justice last week, Hartman found an innovative way to allow the ex-con to light up or pop a gummy: He told the judge to cancel his supervised release.

The prosecutor's generous turnaround is somewhat of an about face. Back in 2018, Hartman caught heavy flack from a Federal Court Judge in White Plains after he continued to credit a mob turncoat who wrongly fingered his own father as the gunman who had killed Purple Gang leader Michael Meldish. Hartman was soon replaced as a prosecutor in the case.

But the prosecutor's decision in the case of ex-drug trafficker Jose (Nano) Pereyra, who has a New York State "license" to use cannabis products for chronic pain, was quickly approved by the judge. And it was lauded as a "great decision" by Pereyra's defense lawyer.

Judge Kennetk KarasBy all accounts, since October of 2019 when he got out of prison, Pereyra, 41, has been going straight, raising a family, working hard, and changing his life around. Nano was released from prison 29 months ago after serving five plus years behind bars for having a leadership role in a Bronx-based cocaine ring that sold many kilograms of coke in the Bronx and its northern suburbs in 2013 and 2014.

Pereyra, a naturalized citizen who was born in the Dominican Republic, suffers chronic pain from injuries he suffered while working as a construction worker from 2004 until his arrest in 2014. He sought permission from White Plains Judge Kenneth Karas for special permission to use marijuana to relieve his pain while serving his post-prison supervised release.

Jose PereyraSince his release, Pereyra has fathered a two-year-old son with his longtime paramour, and has been working as a cement mason, a member of Local 780 of the Cement Masons Union, lawyer Joseph Bondy informed Karas last month. The ex-dealer is providing "financial and emotional" support for his family and has "remained free from contacts with the criminal justice system," the attorney stated.

But the request by Bondy for permission for his client "to use state-legal medical cannabis rather than any other pain medication regimen" while on federal supervised release raised a tricky legal issue. The problem was made stickier since prosecutor Hartman had rejected a request to recommend an early termination to Nano's post-prison supervision that wasn't slated to end until October of 2023.

In his motion for relief, Bondy noted that while Hartman had turned down the request to terminate his client's supervision, the prosecutor took "no position" on allowing Pereyra to use marijuana while on supervised release. Bondy asked the judge to consider that option since it would serve his client well and was not objectionable for the government.

Joseph BondyKaras gave Hartman two weeks to lay out the government's official position to the Court. But it took the nine-year veteran of the U.S. Attorney's office, who was promoted just this month to co-chief of the Securities and Commodities Fraud unit, six weeks to decide the novel query, surely with some guidance from his higher ups, although he and the office aren't talking about that.

Hartman seemed to cover all the bases in his one page reply last week.

Uncle Sam "cannot consent" to permit Pereyra "to use marijuana" while on supervised release because its possession is "illegal under federal law," he wrote. But in "this case," the prosecutor wrote, since the "Probation Office does not oppose it," the government "consent(s)" to the "early termination" of his supervision for several reasons.

"Pereyra's ongoing health issues constitute 'new or unforeseen circumstances' that make termination appropriate," Hartman wrote. He added that "Pereyra's personal characteristics, including his family obligations, his legitimate employment, and his compliance with supervision to date," were other important factors he considered.

"It's a great decision," said Bondy. "It could be momentous" not only for ex-cons on supervised release, but also for injured war veterans "if they can take cannabis instead of getting addicted to opiates," the lawyer added. "This is what happens when you have young aggressive prosecutors and judges who reflect the mores of America."

[Cheech]

Snooooze fest

[Southshore88]

Thanks for posting

[SonnyBlackstein]

Snooooze fest

Amen to that.

A Prosecutor helps a Domincan coke dealer legally use medical Marijuana. Fuck me.


Thanks for the post doc.

[Cheech]

id almost prefer he do a monthly newsletter. or a video blog like mobtalk or whatever. walk arond under the 6 train. some shots of a clubhouse. creepy music in the background.
lisa, how come you stopped feeding him stories? yours were better

[Uforeality]

Could the lack of content that Capeci has lately be a sign of the aging LCN enterprise?

[Cheech]

definitely

[Cheech]

20 years ago the water front would have a story of some west side guy clocking hours that they werent even there and bribery and pay at holidays etc.
nowadays some official got knee surgery

its fun to poke at jerry though. i used to read his articles when I was a kid in the daily news and i pay for his site even tho i dont have to. so i can make fun of him all i want lmao

[SonnyBlackstein]

id almost prefer he do a monthly newsletter.

Switch to monthly would be prudent. There's just not the material for a weekly.

[outfit guy]

Zero sources! Zero! Aside from the ever shrinking FBI crime-family squad supervisors feeding him their propaganda; he has zero street cred. Who runs what? Who's who, aside from the few blocks of Italians remaining where the FEDs linger to finish out their pensions.

[JohnnyS]

Could the lack of content that Capeci has lately be a sign of the aging LCN enterprise?

No doubt but there's still things going on. There's been a lot of deaths over the last year or so that Capeci hasn't wrote about. Some interesting characters in the mob world have passed on. But instead of writing about that he was too busy taking shots at Pennisi and reporting on whatever Gene Borello was up to. He needs to understand his audience. Also he misses some key details in stories that kinda' bug me. Like the other week when he wrote about Mario Gigante. He mentioned his son Salvatore but failed to mention that he followed his father into the Genovese family and is now a captain. If you're just getting you're LCN news through GL you would have no clue about that. I appreciate the man he's a legend but I would be lying if I said I don't think he's phoning it in these days.

Anyway, thanks for posting Dr.

[outfit guy]

Could the lack of content that Capeci has lately be a sign of the aging LCN enterprise?

No doubt but there's still things going on. There's been a lot of deaths over the last year or so that Capeci hasn't wrote about. Some interesting characters in the mob world have passed on. But instead of writing about that he was too busy taking shots at Pennisi and reporting on whatever Gene Borello was up to. He needs to understand his audience. Also he misses some key details in stories that kinda' bug me. Like the other week when he wrote about Mario Gigante. He mentioned his son Salvatore but failed to mention that he followed his father into the Genovese family and is now a captain. If you're just getting you're LCN news through GL you would have no clue about that. I appreciate the man he's a legend but I would be lying if I said I don't think he's phoning it in these days.

Anyway, thanks for posting Dr.

The problem is Jerry jumped in first with his "traditional" OC column in the eighties - cudos - for that; and it was essentially court reporting of OC trials - cudos for that too; he then become a tool of the FBI; never developed street sources due to investigative journalism not easy and rife with risk. Hence he took the easy road of spreading many falsehoods and innuendo; essentially tickled the wire for the government. I frankly have zero respect for the man; YES, I do read his work, but I also peruse rat channels on YouTube.

Thank you for posting.

[newera_212]

Zero sources! Zero! Aside from the ever shrinking FBI crime-family squad supervisors feeding him their propaganda; he has zero street cred. Who runs what? Who's who, aside from the few blocks of Italians remaining where the FEDs linger to finish out their pensions.

Lawyers are a huge source of info too - I personally know two lawyers that have given info to Capeci between 2014 and now. The problem is there really aren't too many new, active cases pending any sort of resolution. That's why we were hearing about the goddamn appeals and compassionate release requests for Frank LoCascio every other week.

The Colombo case is the only one right now that I can think of off the top of my head, and Capeci's been on top of that with every turn. Lawyers for the Vincent Esposito case were keeping Capeci updated and believe it or not, despite traditional Genovese cases the last 25+ years, he was actually planning on going to trial up until the very end. They had a good defense.

If Capeci ingratiated himself with one of these new-found YouTube guys and worked out some sort of deal where their stories were told through GL - which would have to probably be done tying those stories into previous articles - that would be great. Doesn't really seem to beneficial for anyone besides Jerry himself though which is why it hasn't happened yet, probably. I'm sure he's tried.

He's still the best out there at the end of the day. Look forward to the column every week, although the 3rd article on this one was ridiculous.

[outfit guy]

Zero sources! Zero! Aside from the ever shrinking FBI crime-family squad supervisors feeding him their propaganda; he has zero street cred. Who runs what? Who's who, aside from the few blocks of Italians remaining where the FEDs linger to finish out their pensions.

Lawyers are a huge source of info too - I personally know two lawyers that have given info to Capeci between 2014 and now. The problem is there really aren't too many new, active cases pending any sort of resolution. That's why we were hearing about the goddamn appeals and compassionate release requests for Frank LoCascio every other week.

The Colombo case is the only one right now that I can think of off the top of my head, and Capeci's been on top of that with every turn. Lawyers for the Vincent Esposito case were keeping Capeci updated and believe it or not, despite traditional Genovese cases the last 25+ years, he was actually planning on going to trial up until the very end. They had a good defense.

If Capeci ingratiated himself with one of these new-found YouTube guys and worked out some sort of deal where their stories were told through GL - which would have to probably be done tying those stories into previous articles - that would be great. Doesn't really seem to beneficial for anyone besides Jerry himself though which is why it hasn't happened yet, probably. I'm sure he's tried.

He's still the best out there at the end of the day. Look forward to the column every week, although the 3rd article on this one was ridiculous.

I stated prior he was the first but surely not the best. Scott Burnstein covers a broad range of OC groups and keeps fresh. I'll say again the Philadelphia reporter that literally uncovered a Black Mafia and plastered it all over the Philadelphia print press should be considered the real deal. The FBI flat-footed and this story sourced with hangers-on and members. How? he befriended them an built a story piecemeal till it was an expose. That to me it the real deal.

[Waingro]

Thanks for posting.