Merlino charges dropped

[Kash]

Is this “fresh street talk”?

[Ive been waiting to post that for so long ]

[Teflon john]

If this is true i bet the Feds are mad as fuck,but they only have themselves to blame,shady cocksuckers.

[SonnyBlackstein]

Most are pulled once the trial begins but if, for whatever reason, it's still on the table it can be accepted.

Cheers snakes.

[joeycigars]

Most are pulled once the trial begins but if, for whatever reason, it's still on the table it can be accepted.

Cheers snakes.

Pleas are deals with the prosecution, Sometimes the Judge will not stick to a plea deal after the defendant has pled guilty , This happened to Chuck Zito , He pled guilty to a one year deal and got Ten years at sentencing , Food for thought

The feds offered Merlino a 24 month deal minus time served and good time .He would be out in 14 -16 months , So not much of a stretch to drop a case with this many embarrassing side shows going on,


Bard Sirken, Merlinos associate part time driver will get more time then most in this case he is 54 and facing 30 years $2,552,309 in restitution....IDK if he got sentenced yet anyone hear anything,

And If the Feds drop the Charges on Merlino that are coming out of New York , I wonder if Tampa or Philly can then pick up indictments there is open Federal cases in all jurisdictions ?

[Teddy Persico]

Even if the original jurisdiction drops a case they can reindict someone later. It's a bad look for the Feds in court though so it's not common.

[Pete]

If Merlino pleads guilty to illegal gambling in exchange for a reduced sentence, the feds can recharge him in Florida or New Jersey....


I'm hoping for a trial so we can get more info on these guys.

1. Isn't that double jeopardy?
2. Amen I hope it goes to trial. Would love a nice glossy, shiny, sparkly fed chart of the current Philly admin structure.

If he pleads to illegal gambling they can still charge him in a rico case and use that as one of the predicate acts. Should be double jeopardy but the Feds do it all the time. In the Chicago family secrets case all the main defendants had stuff included in their charges that they had previously done time for. Gambling and loan shark offenses mainly. And those were two different rico convictions with the same stuff and then they sprinkle in a few extra charges to classify it as a different conspiracy. Feds don't play fair and they play for keeps

[joeycigars]

Even if the original jurisdiction drops a case they can reindict someone later. It's a bad look for the Feds in court though so it's not common.

Thats what I thought Teddy, So there is legal maneuvering room left in this case on both sides,

[Garbageman]

Welcome to the world of the federal justice system and the acquitted conduct enhancement. Remember the guy who got 20 years for selling an oxy or two? This case makes the feds look ridiculous, and the feds, do not like to be made to look ridiculous!

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[SonnyBlackstein]

If he pleads to illegal gambling they can still charge him in a rico case and use that as one of the predicate acts.

Interesting. Cheers Pete.

[PHL_Mob]

This has actually already happened to Merlino in terms of getting charged twice for the same crime, or "double jeopardy". If you remember back in the 2001 RICO trial, Joey was charged, tried, and acquitted of the RICO predicate act of the 1996 Murder of Joe Sodano (North Jersey Philly Capo he and Natale had ordered killed for not falling in line behind the Merlino/Natale Admin). Shortly after his sentencing, Chris Christie (AG of New Jersey at that time) re-charged him under a seperate murder charge for the same murder of Joe Sodano despite Joey being acquitted in Federal Court as part of the 2001 RICO trial under the grounds that he was acquitted of the murder conspiracy, but he could still be re-tried for the actual murder. Joey and his lawyer, Christopher Warren, argued that this was in fact Double Jeopardy and therefore he should not have been re-tried. The Supreme Court ruled that Joey could in fact be tried again for the Sodano murder because of the fact that the jury verdict against the Sodano Murder RICO predicate act was not unanimous and thus could be tried again in addition to being a different charge from the single count of murder as opposed to 'murder in aid of racketeering'. So basically, the Feds were splitting hairs and taking advantage of a loophole (or taking advantage of minor discrepancies in details/differences in various laws). Personally, whether you like Merlino or not, I think that's a crock of shit that the Government can do that and it's scary that you can literally get acquitted of something like that and then be tried again for it and potentially be guilty despite another jury already clearing you. In my opinion that's a violation of constitutional rights and is pretty scary if you think about it... Talk about the deck being stacked against you in favor of the Feds (like it's not already stacked against you as it is!).

[Garbageman]

If the feds wanted to, they always have 15 unindicted counts of anything they wish to charge one with, waiting in the wings. They'll observe and chronicle 30 counts of wire fraud spanning 2 years and only indict on 5 counts spanning one tear. It's the ratio of possible prison time vs egg on their face that stops them. They'll never look stupid after a plea, once they push you into that corner, you're screwed.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Ivan]

Another thing the feds do that I don't get at all is that thing where they are able to get rid of effective defense attorneys by calling them the "house counsel" of whatever enterprise they are prosecuting. I remember Cutler got disqualified as such because Gotti made a joke about Cutler's fees. That makes no sense to me whatsoever.

[Pogo The Clown]

I think in the Cutler case it was because Gotti implicated him in crimes on the tapes. Saying how he (Cutler) was taking money under the table.


Pogo

[SonnyBlackstein]

This has actually already happened to Merlino in terms of getting charged twice for the same crime, or "double jeopardy". If you remember back in the 2001 RICO trial, Joey was charged, tried, and acquitted of the RICO predicate act of the 1996 Murder of Joe Sodano (North Jersey Philly Capo he and Natale had ordered killed for not falling in line behind the Merlino/Natale Admin). Shortly after his sentencing, Chris Christie (AG of New Jersey at that time) re-charged him under a seperate murder charge for the same murder of Joe Sodano despite Joey being acquitted in Federal Court as part of the 2001 RICO trial under the grounds that he was acquitted of the murder conspiracy, but he could still be re-tried for the actual murder. Joey and his lawyer, Christopher Warren, argued that this was in fact Double Jeopardy and therefore he should not have been re-tried. The Supreme Court ruled that Joey could in fact be tried again for the Sodano murder because of the fact that the jury verdict against the Sodano Murder RICO predicate act was not unanimous and thus could be tried again in addition to being a different charge from the single count of murder as opposed to 'murder in aid of racketeering'. So basically, the Feds were splitting hairs and taking advantage of a loophole (or taking advantage of minor discrepancies in details/differences in various laws). Personally, whether you like Merlino or not, I think that's a crock of shit that the Government can do that and it's scary that you can literally get acquitted of something like that and then be tried again for it and potentially be guilty despite another jury already clearing you. In my opinion that's a violation of constitutional rights and is pretty scary if you think about it... Talk about the deck being stacked against you in favor of the Feds (like it's not already stacked against you as it is!).

+1000
Fucking GREAT post Phil Mob.
Because a jury not reaching a unanimous verdict and because a crime was committed 'in support' of a greater conspiracy IE 'racketeering', he can be retried for THE SAME crime of which he was vindicated of?

To clarify: That the jury, or that the crime was in aid of are SUPERFLUOUS! IE they can be removed and the fact is it is a retrial of SPECIFICALLY the same charge.

The rest is simply additional, surrounding informational/circumstance etc.

It is logically unquestionably double jeopardy.

Great post mate.

[joeycigars]

I think in the Cutler case it was because Gotti implicated him in crimes on the tapes. Saying how he (Cutler) was taking money under the table.


Pogo

Joe Corozzo in the same boat removed as “house counsel” Teddy Persico had something to do with that the “Little Dino” Saracino case.