“But in the eye of the law, fraud spoils everything it touches. The broad seal of the Commonwealth is crumbled into dust, as against the interest designed to be defrauded. Every transaction of life between individuals, in which it mingles, is corrupted by its contagion. Why then, should it find shelter in the decrees of courts? There is the last place on earth where it ought to find refuge. But it is not protected by record, judgment, or decree; whenever and wherever it is detected, its disguises fall from around it, and the lurking spirit of mischief, as if touched by the spear of Ithuriel, stands exposed to the rebuke and condemnation of the law.” Mitchell v. Kintzer, 5 Pa. 216, 217 (1847).

Jury finds Ciavarella GUILTY of filing false tax returns in 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006. He admitted to 03, 05 and 06.

Ciavarella GUILTY of charges he admitted to, conspiracy to defraud the US, filing fraudulent tax returns.

Ciavarella GUILTY of money laundering conspiracy.

Ciavarella GUILTY of racketeering conspiracy.

Ciavarella GUILTY of four honest services mail fraud charges for mailing fraudulent statement of financial interests.

Ciavarella NOT GUILTY of seven extortion counts related to same payments.

Ciavarella NOT GUILTY of money laundering stemming from deposit of checks marked by Powell as condo rent, Mericle payments.

Ciavarella NOT GUILTY of 10 bribery counts stemming from Mericle wire transfers, checks paid as condo rent by Powell, boxes of cash.

Ciavarella NOT GUILTY of four honest services wire fraud counts.

In earlier January I posted an update on a PA Rule 600(E) nominal bail hearing and there is a bit of news on that issue. The Commonwealth still has not brought my client to trial; therefore, I filed a new Rule 600(E) Motion last week. The hearing was held this afternoon and my client was granted nominal bail. His original bail was set at $250,000.00. That’s a quarter million dollars. After today’s hearing on my Motion he was released on $25.00 bail. That’s 2 tens and a five dollar bill.

Obviously, I would have preferred this result when I originally filed the Motion. Nevertheless, persistence paid off and I am pleased that the rule was followed. Something tells me my client’s plans for this weekend just got a bit more interesting.

Trial is set for March 7.

One of my clients keeps changing their address and phone number. The last time I spoke to them they asked me to request a plea agreement; they also gave me a new address. I talked to the DA last Friday and was able to secure a favorable plea offer. I sent the client a letter informing them there was a development in the case and directing them to call me. I also called the client to relate the information and received a recording noting the number was no longer in service.

The letter I sent was just returned to me by the USPS. The mail carrier included a note on the envelope: “NO MAIL BOX.”