• Welcome to ScubaBoard


  1. Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

    Benefits of registering include

    • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
    • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
    • You can make this box go away

    Joining is quick and easy. Login or Register now by clicking on the button

New charges for Sotis (Add helium)and Emilie Voissem (Nexus Underwater)

Discussion in 'Diving Litigation' started by cerich, Oct 31, 2019.

  1. BoltSnap

    BoltSnap Dive Charter

    # of Dives: I'm a Fish!
    Location: Nomad
    6,735
    2,796
    Sotis is committing more acts of extreme stupidity with intent to kill evidence.
     
  2. Ayisha

    Ayisha DIR Practitioner

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: Toronto, Canada
    3,258
    1,593
    When you have a few minutes, it's only 4 pages, but it's eye-widening, jaw dropping reading.
     
  3. Cert1967

    Cert1967 Let's Go Skiing ScubaBoard Sponsor ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: Vail, Colorado
    439
    318
    Rolling along in the case - the defendant files

    DEFENDANT PETER SOTIS’ REPLY TO GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO HIS MOTION IN LIMINE​

    In response to

    GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO SOTIS’s MOTION IN LIMINE

    Will the case go to trail? Maybe - read below and place your bet.

    Only 2% of federal criminal defendants go to trial, and most who do are found guilty

    Nearly 80,000 people were defendants in federal criminal cases in fiscal 2018, but just 2% of them went to trial. The overwhelming majority (90%) pleaded guilty instead, while the remaining 8% had their cases dismissed, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of data collected by the federal judiciary.
     
  4. Cert1967

    Cert1967 Let's Go Skiing ScubaBoard Sponsor ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: Vail, Colorado
    439
    318
    How is age relevant? It is the black letter law that allows a federal judge to retire from regular service - during good behavior, after attaining the combination of age and service requirements. You need to read the whole of A3 to understand the context.


    Senior judges receive full salary and may take a reduced case load.

    While somewhat dated, this article gives some insight. Keep in mind that income plays a role. Federal judges make a good income, although it pales in comparison to their successful peers in private practice.


    Judge Ursula? She is going to try her hand at being a 'rain-maker', with the backstop of her federal pension benefits.

    Why U.S. Judge Ursula Ungaro quit the bench for Boies Schiller partnership

    Judge Ursula Q&A
    Was the relatively low salary compared to what she could make in private practice an issue? I asked.
    “When I started, the disparity was not as great as it is now,” she said, adding that one of her clerks who is moving to Williams & Connolly stands to make more as a new associate than she does as a judge.

    Why retire when you can work? Good for the mind, body and soul.

    If I recall correctly, Judge Brown died at the age of ~104, hearing cases as a senior federal judge for ~30 years, until the last few months of his life. Hailing from Kansas, he was appointed by JFK to the federal bench. A number of federal judges have severed in excess of fifty years - often spanning district and circuit appointments.

    Comparatively, Judge Breyer, ~40 years of A3 service, is a young whippersnapper as he looks forward to his 83 birthday this summer.



    CU4G36OAOZP7JJ3CTHAVGO4IQI.jpg
     
  5. Ayisha

    Ayisha DIR Practitioner

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: Toronto, Canada
    3,258
    1,593


    "If, in fact, the Government does have a strong case without such evidence, then the prejudice to Mr. Sotis will arguably outweigh its marginally-probative value, and the Government should therefore not be permitted to introduce it at trial."

    I don't know if that's a typical type of statement, but if there was no potential for the government's case to be strong without Robotka's testimony, why would they be worried?

    It sounds like they don't have Ken Wesler corroborating (or refuting) what he was told to do with the evidence?
     
  6. Cert1967

    Cert1967 Let's Go Skiing ScubaBoard Sponsor ScubaBoard Supporter

    # of Dives: I just don't log dives
    Location: Vail, Colorado
    439
    318
    The wheels of justice may turn slowly, but they grind exceedingly fine. Plutarch?

    Perhaps divine retribution awaits the defendants?

    Or will they be acquited? The case dismissed?

    Maybe a plea agreement - perhaps to a lesser charge?

    Worse for defendant(s), what addititonal charges may be in the air?

    Defendants speaking with federal authorities knowing that they were being investigated, a good idea? Why did the Ds think the FEDs were at their door? Interesting choice - perhaps another avenue might have been considered?

    And what is going on with defendant Emilie? Maybe a plea deal related to the 'false statement' charge only, or less?

    Trouble sleeping and following along with the paper trail in this case? Your thoughts swayed by reading the motions of one party? You might consider that the adversarial tension between the parties fosters pleadings that are self-serving, perhaps more so from the defendant.


    ORDER SETTING JURY TRIAL AND PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

    THIS MATTER came before the Court for a status conference. As discussed with Counsel, and announced at the status conference; it is
    Ordered that:

    1. This matter is specially set for a jury trial to commence on Tuesday, October 12, 2021, at 9:00 a.m.. The trial is estimated to take seven (7) days;
    <<>>
    5. A Final Pretrial Conference shall be held on Thursday, September 16, 2021, at 10:30 a.m.,
    6. At the Pretrial Conference, the Government shall submit its proffer of the anticipated evidence related to death threats allegedly made by Defendant Sotis referenced in the Parties’ Motions in Limine [DE 35, 39] and as discussed at the status conference;


    Alledged threats against a witness by defendant Sotis?

    Perhaps a violaton of 18 U.S. Code § 1512?

    Still not asleep? Perhaps a review of the Federal Justice Manual, Title 9, Criminal will do it for you.


    Fighting city hall is tough. Fighting the US Goverment - DOJ - is a daunting task.




     

    Attached Files:

    kammel78 likes this.

Share This Page