Comments on: What Kind of Schmuck Would Hire Frank Pignatelli? http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html the tao of criminal defense trial lawyering Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:13:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Mark Bennett http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html/comment-page-1#comment-8715 Mark Bennett Wed, 27 May 2009 02:29:56 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html#comment-8715 SNH, it's a fair question, and one that I couldn't possibly answer without being paid a hefy fee to review the evidence. This – figuring out whether a person should go to trial or plead guilty – is where criminal defense lawyers earn their keep. If Pignatelli was (as the Government alleges) a coconspirator with Robinson, Robinson would've had a tough time getting Pignatelli's testimony excluded. But, as a general principle, more people should go to trial in federal dope cases, and fewer people should plead guilty. SNH, it’s a fair question, and one that I couldn’t possibly answer without being paid a hefy fee to review the evidence. This – figuring out whether a person should go to trial or plead guilty – is where criminal defense lawyers earn their keep.

If Pignatelli was (as the Government alleges) a coconspirator with Robinson, Robinson would’ve had a tough time getting Pignatelli’s testimony excluded. But, as a general principle, more people should go to trial in federal dope cases, and fewer people should plead guilty.

]]> By: SoNotHollywood http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html/comment-page-1#comment-8714 SoNotHollywood Tue, 26 May 2009 22:36:10 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html#comment-8714 I knew both Frank Pignatelli and Chevaliee Robinson. Frank represented me in a drug trafficking case back in 2000. Chev was actually a personal friend of mine. My question is in your professional opinion, did Chev make a mistake by actually pleading guilty to these charges instead of facing a Jury and taking his chance at an appeal? Do you think he would have had good grounds for an appeal given the fact that Frank was the main informant? I know the damage is done and its pretty much over for Chev now but its a question I keep asking myself. I knew both Frank Pignatelli and Chevaliee Robinson. Frank represented me in a drug trafficking case back in 2000. Chev was actually a personal friend of mine.

My question is in your professional opinion, did Chev make a mistake by actually pleading guilty to these charges instead of facing a Jury and taking his chance at an appeal? Do you think he would have had good grounds for an appeal given the fact that Frank was the main informant?

I know the damage is done and its pretty much over for Chev now but its a question I keep asking myself.

]]> By: Mark Bennett http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html/comment-page-1#comment-6889 Mark Bennett Sat, 31 Jan 2009 04:33:40 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html#comment-6889 Also, "actively defending" doesn't really mean anything. If the client is seeking legal advice, what he tells the lawyer is privileged. Also, “actively defending” doesn’t really mean anything. If the client is seeking legal advice, what he tells the lawyer is privileged.

]]> By: Jed S-A http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html/comment-page-1#comment-6888 Jed S-A Sat, 31 Jan 2009 04:30:52 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html#comment-6888 Absolutely not. Former client, current client, doesn't matter. The privilege belongs to the client and it doesn't matter whether or not the client is a current client, a former client, or a deceased client. Absolutely not. Former client, current client, doesn’t matter. The privilege belongs to the client and it doesn’t matter whether or not the client is a current client, a former client, or a deceased client.

]]> By: Not slinging stones http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html/comment-page-1#comment-6885 Not slinging stones Sat, 31 Jan 2009 02:53:04 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html#comment-6885 What if he was no longer acting as his former client's lawyer? If he was not actively defending him, wasn't he free to cooperate with the authorities under strict guidelines without any violation of the attorney-client relationship? What if he was no longer acting as his former client’s lawyer? If he was not actively defending him, wasn’t he free to cooperate with the authorities under strict guidelines without any violation of the attorney-client relationship?

]]> By: Why not just cut out the middle man? « West Virginia Criminal Law Blog http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html/comment-page-1#comment-6865 Why not just cut out the middle man? « West Virginia Criminal Law Blog Fri, 30 Jan 2009 14:20:42 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html#comment-6865 [...] Blog says the story has raised hackles among some legal bloggers. But Mark Bennett of the Defending People blog says it is possible that Pignatelli’s clients were using him to commit crimes. “In that [...] [...] Blog says the story has raised hackles among some legal bloggers. But Mark Bennett of the Defending People blog says it is possible that Pignatelli’s clients were using him to commit crimes. “In that [...]

]]> By: Mark Bennett http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html/comment-page-1#comment-6863 Mark Bennett Fri, 30 Jan 2009 13:10:14 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html#comment-6863 NSS, it doesn't matter. Either (a) he was a coconspirator, and may or may not have violated privilege, but regardless shouldn't be defending people in federal court because he's dirty and the Government has a hold on him; or (b) he was not a coconspirator, violated privilege, and shouldn't be defending people, period. "How could a huge sting move forward on the basis of such a violation?" What's to stop it? NSS, it doesn’t matter. Either (a) he was a coconspirator, and may or may not have violated privilege, but regardless shouldn’t be defending people in federal court because he’s dirty and the Government has a hold on him; or (b) he was not a coconspirator, violated privilege, and shouldn’t be defending people, period.

“How could a huge sting move forward on the basis of such a violation?” What’s to stop it?

]]> By: Not slinging stones http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html/comment-page-1#comment-6859 Not slinging stones Fri, 30 Jan 2009 11:13:43 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html#comment-6859 Forgive me, I just discovered the more recent article which says that Mr. Pignatelli was facing indictment as a co-conspirator. I still don't believe he necessarily violated his attorney-client privilege. How could a huge sting operation move forward on the basis of such a violation? Forgive me, I just discovered the more recent article which says that Mr. Pignatelli was facing indictment as a co-conspirator. I still don’t believe he necessarily violated his attorney-client privilege. How could a huge sting operation move forward on the basis of such a violation?

]]> By: Not slinging stones http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html/comment-page-1#comment-6858 Not slinging stones Fri, 30 Jan 2009 10:58:48 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html#comment-6858 You're all asking good questions. I find it alarming, though, that all this speculation is based on one newspaper article which gave seems to have given very little background information, but which is being held as a paragon of trustworthiness. Mr. Pignatelli has not necessarily violated the attorney-client privilege, though he was accused of doing so by a former client who might not understand what would constitute such a violation. His testimony against this former client was accepted in court in a public trial (the reporter was there to report on it), so how could it be the sort of thing that would undermine the entire justice system? And does anyone know what he was being indicted for? The article says the prosecutor accused him of helping his clients to purchase "stash houses". No mention is made at all of the content of the indictment. In my opinion, such an accusation probably has nothing to do with his criminal indictment, being that it was voiced during someone else's trial where his credibility as a witness and provider of crucial evidence was under fire. I think he is probably guilty of some level of dishonesty, but none of us really have any idea what he is guilty of based on a single article concerning a former client's trial, which is the only source of information anybody is quoting. Does anybody have any real facts to support these fiery opinions? You’re all asking good questions. I find it alarming, though, that all this speculation is based on one newspaper article which gave seems to have given very little background information, but which is being held as a paragon of trustworthiness. Mr. Pignatelli has not necessarily violated the attorney-client privilege, though he was accused of doing so by a former client who might not understand what would constitute such a violation. His testimony against this former client was accepted in court in a public trial (the reporter was there to report on it), so how could it be the sort of thing that would undermine the entire justice system? And does anyone know what he was being indicted for? The article says the prosecutor accused him of helping his clients to purchase “stash houses”. No mention is made at all of the content of the indictment. In my opinion, such an accusation probably has nothing to do with his criminal indictment, being that it was voiced during someone else’s trial where his credibility as a witness and provider of crucial evidence was under fire.

I think he is probably guilty of some level of dishonesty, but none of us really have any idea what he is guilty of based on a single article concerning a former client’s trial, which is the only source of information anybody is quoting. Does anybody have any real facts to support these fiery opinions?

]]> By: Bobby Mims http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html/comment-page-1#comment-6799 Bobby Mims Tue, 27 Jan 2009 17:36:16 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2009/01/what-kind-of-schmuck-would-hire-frank-pignatelli.html#comment-6799 Is it me or what? How can a Federal Judge allow this sort of evidence obtained from a lawyer who is really a snitch? What about the ethics of the Federal Prosecutor? It seems to me this is an ethical violation on more than just the so-called lawyer! If I were a judge I would never countenance allowing such evidence in my court. Thoughts? Is it me or what? How can a Federal Judge allow this sort of evidence obtained from a lawyer who is really a snitch? What about the ethics of the Federal Prosecutor? It seems to me this is an ethical violation on more than just the so-called lawyer! If I were a judge I would never countenance allowing such evidence in my court. Thoughts?

]]>