FEDERAL SECURITY OVERVIEW WITH CITED EXHIBITS

JAMES & JANICE SKRZYPEK
ARE THE INNOCENT ACCUSED.

Please read our "OVERVIEW WITH CITED EXHIBITS " and this will help "fill in the blanks" for you on questions you may have.

"This conviction is woven and replete with so much corruption and criminal conduct by the prosecution that it cannot possibly be allowed to stand. From the illegal, "covert," searches, repeated break-ins of our home, withholding of Brady Material, perjury and manufactured evidence, among others, this case will eventually surface as a textbook example of what can occur when unbridled corruption becomes the standard of the prosecution.

It is hard to comprehend that something like this can go on in a Country such as ours, but once you understand the evil that pervades throughout these agencies, it becomes clear that the right combination of circumstances wiII lend itself to these injustices. It is tantamount to the conditions that exist during a tornado or other natural disaster where there is heat, rapid cooling, moisture in the air and lightning and then, a tornado!

We are not thieves. We never have been, and it makes no sense that we would start now."

FEDERAL SECURITY OVERVIEW WITH CITED EXHIBITS

I.
INTRODUCTION

1.

II.
FEDERAL SECURITY COMPANY HISTORY

3.

A.

Daily Shootings

4.

B.

Government Investigators

6.

C.

S.T.A.R. Program

8.

D.

Brian Lundin, Contract Security

9.

E.

Outside Bids

10.

F.

The Walkout

11.

G.

February 24, 1994 Break-In

13.

H.

CHA Specific Requirements

14.

I.

Guardian/Triad v. Chicago Housing Authority

16.

J.

Continued Violence

20.

K.

Presidential Visit

21.

L.

Suspicious Activity

22.

I I I.
OCTOBER 19, 1994 SEARCH

23.

A.

Monkey Virus

24.

B.

Monarch Security

24.

C.

Motor Vehicle Accident

25.

D.

Walgreens

25.

E.

Lawsuits

26.

F.

Henry Pawlik C.P.A.

27.

G.

Winston & Strawn

28.

H.

Demand for Payment

29.

IV.
PROSECUTORIAL CRIMINAL CONDUCT

30.

A.

Audiotapes

31.

B.

Anthony Pellicano, Audiotape Expert

34.

C.

Court Order

37.

D.

Second Audiotape Expert

40.

E.

Testing Continues

44.

F.

Third Audiotape Expert

45.

G.

Kozak Re-Called

47.

H.

IRS Agent Jose Franco

48.

I.

Selective Prosecution

49.

1.

Attorney James Koch

51.

V.
TRIAL

A.

Dr. Martin Lanoff

51.

B.

Bethany Hospital

57.

C.

Metropolitan Correctional Center

58.

D.

No Counsel

59.

E.

Dr. John Liu, Assistant Professor of Neurology,

Northwestern Memorial Hospital

60.

F.

Attorney James Koch, Plea Negotiator

60.

G.

Release from Custody

61.

H.

FBI Case Agent Robert Shoup and the

Fingerprints.

61.

I.

Government Witnesses

62.

J.

Mysterious Checks

63.

K.

Juror Misconduct

63.

L.

Forensic Accountant Samuel Remer

64.

M.

No Possible Mistakes

66.

N.

Flee and Plea

67.

O.

Private Detective Paul Ciolino

68.

P.

Abandonment by Defense Attorney Eric

Ferleger

68.

VI.
JANICE SKRZYPEK'S VERBATIM FAX REPORTS TO

THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, WASHINGTON D.C.

DURING THE FIRST 12 DAYS OF TRIAL, WHILE

JAMES IS IN CUSTODY

71.

VII.
PROSECUTORIAL CRIMINAL CONDUCT AND

88.

NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE

88.

IX.
INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL

103.

X.
CLOSING

107.

I. INTRODUCTION

Over ten years have passed and the lives of both my wife and I have changed forever.
What began as an effort to start a new business, turned horribly into a nightmare that has been re-lived over and over, day after day, reaching a crescendo upon our Wrongful Conviction in March 2002. It has wreaked immeasurable pain, suffering and debilitating health conditions that were and are exacerbated by what we have been through. It has also taken its toll on our families as well.
I think the most difficult thing to imagine is why you are in this situation in the first place. You pinch yourself to see if you are dreaming or ifit's really happening to you.
When reality sets in you can't believe it! Then things start to unfold that render you in a state of disbelief You remain under intense suspicion for suspected wrongdoing, you are slowly being destroyed in a variety of ways, some from within such as your health, and some from outside in the destruction of what you have worked for in life, and you ask yourself WHY. Why is this happening to us? You try to search for answers that are not there.
Everything is veiled in a cloak of secrecy. Surprises are everywhere, and it gets to a point where you jump off your chair when the telephone rings or have to look out your window to see who's at the door! One thing, though, is constant; your heart never beats the same as before!
I can only imagine what the wrongfully convicted in this Country go through when they wait to die for something they did not do. I often remark to my wife of what our friend and my former high school priest, Father Al Kocon used to tell me when I complained about something, and his story of the man who complained because he had no shoes, until he saw the man with no legs. Moral being, there is always someone out there that has it worse than you. While this is certainly true, the shocking similarities in all these cases are frightening. All are a result of law enforcement misconduct, prosecutorial misconduct or both.
Consider the plight of recent cases around the Country and here at home. One such case was decided by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, right here in Chicago. It involves the case of a former Chicago police officer who was given a death sentence for a murder he did not commit. Kind of common these days in Illinois, but what was most alarming was the identity of the law enforcement agency shown responsible for manufacturing the evidence. It was none other than the government and the FBI.
On January 24, 2005 a jury in Chicago awarded Mr. Manning more than 6.5 million dollars against the two FBI Agents that framed him on both murder and kidnapping charges. The case was a landmark decision because it was the first time that an award was made against FBI Agents personally. Judge Matthew Kennelly has yet to rule on additional damages that Mr. Manning has against the FBI.
My perception of a sterling agency that was above reproach was forever changed after I was placed against a wall of my office and searched on October 19, 1994, when all of this started. I was taken into my wife's office where the vertical blinds in front of the window were closed. Slight spaces in the blinds, however, enabled me to observe agents lifting out ceiling tiles and removing wires. I realized then, that the burglary months earlier on February 24, 1994, (Chicago Police Department RD# YO 78750), was not just an effort to steal a cheap fax machine and a company hand held radio, but rather the traditional "Black Bag Job" that I would later come to find would be common in our case.                                                             (1)
II. FEDERAL SECURITY COMPANY HISTORY
Federal Security. Inc. was incorporated in 1986 to provide security guard services on a contracted basis. The company did sporadic business until 1991 when it was requested by the Chicago Housing Authority to provide security services in some of their developments.
The company initially responded to three buildings. one in Ogden Courts Developments and the other two in the Robert Taylor Homes. Unlike any new company starting out. Federal began a historic rise in growth. With this growth came obstacles and conditions unlike those of any business or venture.
Financial problems were first and foremost. The question was how to pay the officers? This. in and of itself: necessitated the cooperation of bank officials at the bank we did our business with. A line of credit was extended to us with collateralization of properties we owned.
A hiring process was started. because the company was asked to handle more locations at the Chicago Housing Authority than initially requested. The company doubled its locations within a few weeks and then began taking over buildings at a rate of 10 to 15 at a time to where manpower had to be hired overnight. The contingency of personnel quickly grew to over 300 officers. full and part time.                           (2)
Safety, appearance, and training were placed high on the priority list. Up until our entry at the CHA, those factors were never a part of any equation. Officers dressed any way they wanted. wore any type of weapon imaginable or none at all. and had no remedial training other than what they received by state mandate. which was 40 hours of training.
A second location was acquired at 628 W. 47th Street in Chicago, so that it would serve as a logistical element in proximity to the developments we served. It was blocks from the Stateway, Wentworth and Robert Taylor Homes. It also served as training center and satellite administration office. The building was acquired with personal assets in order to secure the loan. The government used this as a vehicle to inf1ate our personal income. Payroll and timekeeping were added later. As mentioned earlier, Federal began a formidable presence in the security industry.                                        (3)
Federal was recognized as an up and coming company that cared about is employees. Programs were developed so that employees would be able to purchase equipment such as bulletproof vests, uniform leather goods and pagers to name a few, by payroll deduction. Free life insurance was given to full time officers. These items were not available through any security competitor and were necessary because of the astronomical violence that took place daily in these developments. Payroll advances were also made to personnel on an emergency basis for a death in the family, medical emergency or legitimate underlying need. The company offered free limousine services with a driver, for the officer and immediate family members at no cost.
A. DAILY SHOOTINGS
Casualties were a common occurrence, with the first happening in December 1991.
Our officer shot and killed a subject. who had just wrestled the weapon away from the holster of another officer. This began a series of fatalities and injuries by gun violence, which continuously escalated.
(4)
In 1992, Officer David Borges was shot and killed after being followed by a 17 year old resident of the Lathrop Court Developments, after he stepped off a bus at Long Avenue and Diversey in Chicago, near his home. Unfortunately, Borge's vest did not protect him as the bullet entered below it, ricocheting throughout his body after def1ecting off the inner portions of the bulletproof vest.
Shortly afterwards, another officer was also killed and his partner was wounded at the Washington Park Developments. A juvenile offender came into the building and was denied entrance by the officer, at which time he pulled out an automatic weapon, shot and killed Officer Leonard Williams and also seriously wounded his partner, Officer Jeanette Cunningham.
Numerous woundings of officers by gunfire continued throughout the period Federal was in the CHA. Some officers were so badly shot; they were unable to return to security work. Others had permanent injuries that affected them for the rest of their lives. At one point in 1993, there were a total of 200 to 300 bona fide shooting reports a day at the CHA. This was especially true in the Robert Taylor Homes, where our officers were pinned down in the buildings for their entire eight-hour shift, because of the shootings. These shootings and violence were so bad that it prompted a visit to the CHA from President Bill Clinton.
The majority of officers were transported to the Cook County Hospital Trauma Section, where I would always manage to be there before the ambulance arrived at the emergency room entrance. The volume of incidents increased so much that the trauma room doctor eerily remarked to me that he knew who I was, because he recognized the patches on the officer's uniforms. Needless to say, the association was surreal and one of the darker moments since providing security at the Chicago Housing Authority.
(5)
In 1993, Federal Security provided free security to the residents of Marquette Park in the area bounded by 63^{rd Street to 79th Street, and Western Avenue to California. Garages were being burned to the ground at an alarming rate, and residents were attempting to set up security services as a supplement to the Chicago Police Department.}
Frustration was continuously growing among the residents and the increased police protection afforded to the neighborhood had not seemed to stop the rash of arsons. I decided to provide a uniformed officer and a patrol car to the area, twenty four hours a day, seven days a week at no cost. Federal Security was featured on CLTV News and had articles written in the local press.
On October 18, 1994. I authorized the payment of $4,000.00 to the Mother of Eric Morse to pay the cost of funeral arrangements for the child, who was dropped out of a high rise development window for not participating in the stealing of candy. Although this building was not one that was assigned to Federal Security. I felt that something should be done to help lift the burden of the Mother and family.
Before Federal was put out of business one day later on October 19, 1994, a total of two officers were killed by gunfire and approximately 19 were critically wounded. All of this in a little over three years. A news cameraman took actual film footage of a shooting at the Robert Taylor Homes, where an officer was actually shot. Exhibit 1.
B. GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATORS
The first obstacle that occurred with Federal was a visit in 1991 by investigators from the lIIinois Department of Professional Regulation. These investigators came to our offices unannounced, to inform me that the company was not in compliance with
(6)
Department of Professional Regulation requirements as to the carrying of firearms by our officers. State regulations called for security officers to physically carry a Firearm Authorization Card. commonly referred to as a "tan card'".
Applications were submitted on all of our officers. but the Department of Professional Regulation had not processed these due to understaffing of personnel. Anticipating that a problem may occur with this. the company was able to obtain a letter from Deputy Director, Michael Fulman, allowing our officers to work under the submitted applications. Upon presentation of this letter to the investigators, it was determined that Federal would be allowed to operate pending receipt of the Firearm Authorization Cards.
The next hurdle followed a few months later with the arrival of an agent from the U.S. Department of Labor. The company was told that a complaint had been made that personnel were not receiving over time after working a forty-hour workweek. Our accountant met with Agent Robert Lisee. at our offices. and it was determined that Federal Security was not exempt from over time payments because of its quasi law enforcement status while on CHA prope11y. even though the CHA was not required to pay us over time.
This created a tremendous financial burden on the company and gave rise to attempts to control or eliminate overtime. This was seen as the one major financial problem that must be controlled in order to have the company survive and prosper.
Specialized experienced personnel were hired. special computer software was purchased with some limited over time reliet: but the problem could never be totally eliminated. Certain officers would almost work around the clock. because other officers would not call or arrive for work. Efforts were made to hire additional personneL but no matter what we tried, the problem of overtime continued along with the abuses.
(7)
c. S.T.A.R. PROGRAM
Since the CI IA was not paying for over time, efforts were made to try to seek relief of the rule of armed officers only being deployed to some locations. Permission was asked to have one armed and one unarmed officer at a location. That was denied.
Federal formulated a program with the acronym S.T.A.R., which stood for Security Trained Area Residents. Exhibit 2. The program would allow Federal to train certain residents of the buildings to become security officers and have them work in the buildings were they reside. This would benefit both Federal and CHA, in that the company would be giving back to the community, by training unemployed CHA residents for work, while reducing the over time by having an officer available in an emergency and to work in the lobby of his or her building. The program was not approved for Federal Security by the CHA. We learned later that a competitor, T-Force Security was given our program, which was approved by the CHA, with the end result of it being stopped because of double billing. The company tried to pay certain officers who were supervisors on a salary basis.
This, it was thought, would help eliminate some of the overtime at various sites. This approach was somewhat successful, but did not eliminate the problem entirely.
Administrative staff was found calling those officers who wanted to work overtime and not calling the ones at home because it was the path of least resistance. Many of the officers at home could have worked at straight time, thus saving the company money. This was evident when I received a call from one of the officers who complained that he called the 47th Street office requesting work. He told me that he heard they were short of personnel. He was told that all of the posts were full and he was not needed.
(8)
When I called the office, I found the opposite. When r investigated further, I found that both the chief on duty and the dispatcher on duty were selling over time to officers in exchange for receiving a portion of their over time pay. Abuses such as this cost the company thousands of dollars and further gave a feeling of exasperation, because no matter what you tried to do, an unanticipated event such as this could ruin even the best thought out plans. Even two over time experts were hired at $40,000.00 each and that was not enough to solve the problem.
I had tried to ferret out wrongdoing as best I could by hiring a former partner r had worked with on the Cook County SherifTs Police Department to do internal investigations. I also hired a former employee of mine, who had his security credentials.
I had him work undercover in many of the buildings where he was to observe the officers on duty and report any disciplinary problems that he observed, such as drinking, sleeping, watching television, etc. It got so bad that he would report the incidents to me as they were occurring by calling me at the office on the pay phone in the lobby and describing what was taking place. The officers could never understand how I knew they were not in uniform, or were standing outside not doing their jobs. No matter what was done, it was determined that in order to maintain any form of discipline, you would almost have to put someone at each building to watch the officers.
D. BRIAN LUNDIN, CONTRACT SECURITY
Throughout 1991 and 1992, when the company started growing, Brian Lundin was Director of Contract Security. Lundin was a retired Chicago Police Sergeant. Lundin and I became friends, because we were both former police officers. Lundin had been asked by
(9)
Vincent Lane, Chairman of the CHA to assist in formulation the CHA Police Department and then take over responsibilities for contract security. Lundin instituted many of the processes for invoicing, deduction, discrepancies and infractions that were used in the CHA. He admitted previously, and most recently that for most of his deduction or infractions, he had no authority from HUD or the CHA to do many of the things he had done to us while we were providing security at the CHA. There was no policy or directives to give him any authority to take money from us over the time he was there.
On one occasion, he told my wife that if she did not settle for 50 percent of the invoice amount requested and he found one, just one mistake on her invoice, he would not give her a dime. There was absolutely no way of administratively appealing or requesting a hearing for any deductions or policy implementations by Lundin or the CHA. You either went along with the program or you were out. That simple! You were not even allowed to have an attorney review your contract. No changes could be made.
E. OUTSIDE BIDS
Federal attempted to diversify the contracts it had by attempting to bid on other security areas by other government agencies. The earliest contract Federal had with a government agency was when it was awarded the Youth Center operated by the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services at Oak Park and Irving in Chicago.
The contract called for the hiring of youth officers from the Chicago Police Department. Another company had held the contract when Federal won the bid. When we won the bid, we were told that the Youth Officers working the old contract were familiar with the contract and that we should keep them employed.
(10)
All was going well until I found that the required contingency of manpower was never at the location at one time. Visits by mysclfto the location at early hours of the morning found the same response all of the time, which was the officer went for coffee, or he went home to get something.
When I put pressure on the sergeant from the Chicago Police Department, the officers refused to work. I had to get officers from the Cook County Sheriffs Police on an emergency basis in order to keep the contract. I would not crack under pressure so that my license would be put into jeopardy by my not having the proper amount of personnel at that location. I remember being introduced to the Chicago Police City Wide Youth Commander when I needed help after the walkout. He assisted me in obtaining other youth officers from other districts who would work this detail. He was very supportive and indicated that I did the right thing.
F. THE WALKOUT
A second, more major problem occurred in August of 1992 when Federal became a target of a walkout by approximately 20 of its officers over disciplinary action taken against a supervisor they were supporting. The National Labor Relations Board initiated a complaint for unfair labor practices in 1993. which was eventually found itself to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals where enforcement was denied. Exhibit 3.
A lawsuit was also brought against the participants of the walkout later in 1999 that resulted in another unfair labor practice charge brought against us. The case was initiated because of revelations made during a chance encounter with a former employee, who said that the initial charges brought by the National Labor Relations Board against us were a result of the Board Attorney Richard Paz, falsifying affidavits for employees to sign. Exhibit 4. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, because of a June 2002 decision by the United States Supreme Court has remanded the entire case back to the National Labor Relations Board. A decision has not been reached to date. Exhibit 5.
(11)

It should be noted that the proceedings that were before the National Labor Relations Board in Chicago, were conducted before an Administrative Law Judge in February 1994, while a Grand Jury was hearing allegations of criminal conduct on our part. In the entire National Labor Relations Board transcript, not one officer who testified, not one government official, not one employee of the Chicago Housing Authority ever said that there was any over billing, vacant guard positions, any financial irregularity or problems with Federal Security. Exhibit 6.
There were plenty of officers who testified about working conditions, rate of pay, expectations of unlimited overtime, uniform allowances, free health insurance etc., which in the majority of instances were there before I arrived. But isn't it strange that no one, NO ONE, had anything to say about false time sheets, working without a partner or not getting paid! Remember, this is testimony in February 1994!
In 1992, after the walkout occurred, investigators from the Department of Professional Regulation made another visit. They had arrived, after indicating the day before, that they would be doing a spot audit. What had begun as a request for a spot audit. quickly turned into a major affair, with the investigators appearing the following morning and advising me that they would be there for three days and would be looking at every one of my tiles. All protests of this action were repelled and appeals to their supervisors fell on deaf ears. During the audit, I had found that one of the investigators was removing
(12)
documents from the personnel files. I substantiated this when they left for lunch and reviewed the files and found records missing. I called our attorney, who was the previous Chief of Enforcement for the Department of Professional Regulation.

Our attorney arrived at our offices before the investigators returned from lunch.
When they were confronted, they admitted photocopying documents, but not removing them. The end result was a termination of the audit and the issuance of a formal complaint against me for revocation of my license by the Department of Professional Regulation. We were charged with 357 counts of non compliance and in the end, 356 counts were dismissed. A fine was levied against the company for not having a branch license at our south side office.
Federal Security continued to grow over the next several months and emerged as the largest security company at the Chicago Housing Authority, and most probably in the State, with several hundred full and part time employees. Exhibit 7.
G. FEBRAURY 24, 1994 BREAK-IN
After the break-in on February 24, 1994, unusual happenings occurred with no explanation, such as checks being held back by the CHA for no apparent reason. One Million Two Hundred Thousand Dollars, ($1,200,000), in a check, was finally received by the CHA in August of 1994, after bills were deliberately delayed so that the operation undertaken by the government would succeed. It was thought that this would "squeeze" us, so as to assist in the etTorts to corrupt or snare additional officers into criminal conduct,
(13)
however, when threats were made to suspend security services to the CHA, the check finally appeared!
H. CHA SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
Billings were routinely submitted as usual, with the insistence that all of the sheets were perfect, or they would not be processed. Contract Security Director Brian Lundin started this procedure early on. He initially allowed us to make corrections by scratching out, drawing a line through a name when arrival/departure times for guards were incorrect, initialing them, then turning them in. If one were to examine time sheets from when we started at CHA, one would see my initials or my wife's next to a correction on a time sheet. It was done because policy was constantly being changed, almost on a daily basis, such as the sign in/sign out times for guards. It started as straight time initially, i.e. 8 to 4, 4 to 12, 12 to 8. Then it was changed to military time 0800 to 1600 etc. Since most of the guards were not in the military, numerous mistakes occurred.
Then, abruptly, Lundin rescinded permission to correct the time sheets. They were either perfect or were not processed for payment. We were forced to hire numerous Payroll Lieutenants out of our own pocket to insure that the time sheets were perfect, or we wouldn't get paid. There was never any reimbursement from the CHA. It made no sense to spend additional payroll money that was not being reimbursed by the CHA, in order to hire additional personnel to correct the time sheets.
We also wanted to implement a Kronos System whereby a time clock would have been placed in each location so that guards could swipe in and out. It would simultaneously notify both the CHA and us that a guard was on duty. We offered to pay for this system out of our own pocket, but that too, was denied.
(14)

As mentioned previously, policy was being changed at the CHA, almost on a daily basis. When we started at CHA, we were allotted 1 supervisor for every 10 guards. Then that was reduced to one supervisor for 20 officers. It made it very difficult because our locations were so spread out. It would take a supervisor more than his 8 hour shift to be able to visit all of his sites more than once, which made it easier for some of the officers to disappear after being checked by a supervisor.
After a few months at CHA, we were cut down one dollar an hour for guards, and one dollar an hour for supervisors. We had been paying ofticers more than the minimum wage CHA recommended which was $5.72 per hour. The Chairman of the CHA, Vincent Lane, paid another company, New Life Security which was owned and operated by the Nation of Islam, one dollar and hour higher than what he was paying us, and that was for an unarmed officer who traditionally was paid at a much lower rate because they were not wearing a gun! We, however, were not getting paid at all for an unarmed ofticer and deducted for those officers who were not in possession of State required credentials. The Nation of Islam provided convicted felons as security guards, which was highly publicized in the media. When CHA Chaim1an Vince Lane was later convicted, it was disclosed that the Nation of Islam was an anchor tenant at a defunct shopping center that Lane had an interest in.
Memos were constantly faxed by CHA Contract Security, changing locations, hours, number of officers, rules, deployments, tenant identification sheets, recognized political building presidents and building officers, etc. Lundin insisted on in-service training for guards at company expense, so as to enforce the --CHA Guidelines", promulgated by Federal Court Decree. Training sessions had to be done with regularity and the list of officers trained had to be faxed over to the CHA Office of Contract Security. Those that did not attend the training sessions could not work. It seemed as though we were always being held to a higher standard which the CHA themselves, could not attain.
(15)

It seemed that the training was only to insulate the CHA from lawsuits against them because I would constantly write letters to Chairman Vince Lane, about an officer who saved a tenant from a burning apartment, or captured a rape suspect or recovered a gun from a gang member. I would give a bonus of $50.00 to an officer as an incentive for a "job well done". Lundin, however, told me to stop writing those letters because, "The Chairman", was tired of reading them!
Lundin was transferred out of his position after former Chicago Police Superintendent Leroy Martin was given a job as the Director of Public Safety. His replacements were temporary and were many. We made every attempt to cooperate with each "Acting Director" as they were appointed. There were at least four more people placed in this position within a year and a half. The last Acting Director, Barbara (Bl) Davis consistently spoke to some of the guards on how she hated Federal. The comments began to take on racial overtones constantly referring to us as "white slaves". Exhibit 8.
I. GUARDIAN/TRIAD V. CHICAGO HOUSING AUTHORITY
While numerous obstacles against Federal Security were a mainstay, an unknown, ongoing lawsuit by a former security company was being pursued against the Chicago Housing Authority in the 7th^{Circuit Court of Appeals. The circumstances and the events surrounding this litigation were identical to what was occurring with us and mirrored our relationship with the Chicago Housing Authority.                                                                           (16)}
The volumes of materials that we had discovered were shocking and beyond belief! It was as though you could lay them on top of each other and the end result would be the same. All of this was turned over to our defense attorney Elliot Samuels.
I had several conversations with Mr. Kenneth Kotz. President of Guardian/Triad Security and he said that the CHA had initiated a Grand Jury investigation of him and his partner, James Malinowski that lasted for five years. The accusations were identical, along with the problems he had with billing and being paid. The racial overtones were pervasive and the pattern of behavior exhibited with his company was exactly what had happened to us. Some examples were:
1. Elimination of non-violent Senior Housing sites and replacing them with high crime/ violent projects i.e. Robert Taylor Homes, Cabrini Green Homes, and Rockwell Gardens. This was done exactly for the same reason that it was done to Guardian/Triad, which was to intentionally give you housing sites that the administration fully knows is impossible to handle without serious consequences such as woundings, injuries and shooting fatalities. Guard companies enjoying the less serious senior housing sites would have minimal incidents and would show a more favorable appearance in their evaluations.
2. Withholding payments for months at a time and paying other companies within days of their submissions. Exhibit 9. At one point, after payments had been withheld for a period of two months. notification of a suspension of service was being considered because of a lack of payment. Under these circumstances. it was impossible for us to make timely tax payments. This prompted the issuance of a check by the CHA for 1.2 million dollars for a period of two months service.

3. Requirements that invoices be perfect, such as signatures, times and dates. No white outs, scratch outs or other corrections were permitted. This required us to hire additional employees, which were not reimbursable by the CHA, which strained our already overburdened guard contingency. These employees could have been deployed to staff housing developments and relieve some of the burden unnecessarily placed upon existing guards.      (17)
4. Failure to discipline other guard companies that were discovered defrauding the Chicago Housing Authority. These companies were T-Force Security, GEl Security and Digby Security. Exhibit 10. Christian Maerz became Inspector General of the Chicago Housing Authority in 1988 and conducted an investigation of GEl Security and concluded that GEl Security was "ripping off' the CHA by billing the Authority for work not performed. These findings were shared with the CHA. GEl was never terminated". Exhibit 11. This was years before our company started at the CHA with Maerz being the same Inspector General who wrongfully accused us and Guardian/Triad Security.
5. Paying overtime and higher rates of pay to other guard companies such as New Life Security, which was owned and operated by Leonard Muhammad, son in law of Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam. The guards were paid a dollar more an hour for being unarmed than we were being paid for armed. They had no Illinois State credentials, training or uniforms, and up until their hiring were previously paroled inmates. They were arrested by the Chicago Police Department for incidents occurring blocks away from their locations. Countless newspaper articles and television media reports confirmed the foregoing. It was later learned that Vince Lane, Chairman of the CHA had ties to Farrakhan at a shopping center located on the south side of Chicago. Guardian/Triad had the same problems.
(18)

6. Removal from the Rockwell Gardens Housing Developments with guards employed by New Life Security stationed in our locations. The same set of circumstances prevailed with Guardian/Triad Security when their services were terminated and they were instructed to assist in the transition to Digby and GEl Security.
7. Contacted by the CHA and asked if we would provide security at the housing developments. Exhibit 12. Hourly pay was subsequently reduced one dollar across the board a few months after we started.
8. Received the same treatment that Guardian/Triad experienced from Renault Robinson through Vince Lane as if their eras' "blended together". Exhibit 13. It was as if Robinson tutored Lane in the same behavior.
9. Wrongful billing accusations reported by Vince Lane and Barbara Davis of Contract Security on Guardian/Triad as was reported for Federal. Exhibit 14.
These items open a window and allow you to see the problems and the obstacles that two white security guard companies were experiencing. I only wish that I had known of this suit well in advance so that I would have realized that I was not the only one that was experiencing these problems. Many other things were kept secret from us and officials such as Lane, Maerz, Davis and others within the CHA made it increasingly difficult to perform. They had a deliberate agenda that was hatched long before our company arrived on the scene, which was abundantly evident from the discovery of the very same security companies that were defrauding the Authority long before we got there, by the same Inspector GeneraL and allowing them to continue to defraud the CHA with impunity, long after we were gone!
(19)

J. CONTINUED VIOLENCE
During these next few years, news reports constantly blared the ever-increasing shootings and violence at the CHA. What made matters worse was the statements by Chairman Vince Lane that were constantly being made in the press about "rent a cops". finally wrote to the Chicago Tribune concerning these statements and my letter was published in the editorial section. Exhibit 15.
I tried to defend the guards as best I could, but found that it was an uphill battle, with trying to fight several fronts and lacking any support, especially from the agency that hired you. You were damned if you did and damned if you didn't. It became almost as though you were responsible for the decades ofvioIence and mistakes that took place in these projects. There was no one that wanted to hear about any good whatsoever.
I continued to try to build some sort of esprit de corps among the guards by continuing our newsletters and encouraging them to put the best face in the face of adversity. Exhibit 16. It became increasingly difficult especially around the time that President Clinton visited the CHA on July 17, 1994, at a building we were staffing with guards.
(20)
K. PRESIDENTIAL VISIT
I was at the site where the President was to arrive and asked the Secret Service Agent in Charge, Desmond Scanlan, if I could stand near where the President would be arriving. I identified myself as a retired police officer. and he gave his permission. Shortly thereafter, I observed both Public Safety Director Christian Maerz and his Deputy Frank Rogers approach him. A short time later, Agent Scanlon came over to me and said, "I don't know what the problem is, but they don't want you near the President". I was shocked by this statement but stayed on the sidewalk where I was previously. A few minutes later, Barbara, (BJ) Davis, Acting Director of CHA Contract Security approached me with a Lieutenant from the CHA proprietary security force and told me to leave or they would arrest me.
When this happened, I made a phone call to Henry Cisneros, Secretary of HUD, who accompanied the President, and who had earlier met with me, to ask why there was a problem. Secretary Cisneros had sent me a letter commending us for the work we were doing. Exhibit 17. I was never able to speak with him and find out what was occurring.
In trial testimony, when trying to explain how I could have said, "we met already", Rick Kozak said that a Secret Service Agent had pointed my out when the President came to Chicago. This was a bold face lie since Agent Scanlan never knew who I was to point me out, and the only two people that spoke to Scanlan were Maerz and Rogers, because I saw them at all times. Even Freedom of Information Requests on the Secret Service showed no contact, whatsoever, with me. In December 2004, a letter was received from the United States Secret Service which conducted an interview with Secret Service Agent Desmond Scanlan, who was the Agent in Charge of the Secret Service on that day, confirming what I have indicated. Exhibit 18.
(21)

Kozak compounded his perjury by not taking into account that I would remember the event so clearly. and the name of the Secret service Agent in Charge.
L. SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY
Things began to become stranger and stranger as months went on and a series of unexplained events started to occur. On February 24, 1994. I was alerted to a suspicious vehicle parked in front of our offices on West Foster Avenue at around 3:00 A.M. My residence was adjacent to the office and the call was from two of my security Chiefs, who were parked in the church lot across the street.
I came out of my residence and observed an older model vehicle with an obese female white occupant as a passenger, and a tall white or Hispanic male with long black hair standing at the rear of the vehicle. I checked the offices and went back to my residence and was awakened by the burglar alarm about an hour later. When I went next door to the office the front glass door had been broken and the offices had been burglarized.
I called the Chicago Police Department (RD# YO 78750). and thought that the burglary was rather unusual since only a cheap fax machine valued at $200.00 was taken, along with one of our company hand held portable radios. The offender(s) len expensive computer equipment and office machines behind.
The offender(s) went through an opening between our two offices and opened an electrical circuit box and popped several push button breakers. I thought this unusual, since the box is not even located in our security office, with the one controlling the alarm located much closer in the rear.
(22)
III. OCTOBER 19, 1994 SEARCH
As stated previously, the burglary came center stage when the F.B.I. searched our offices and placed me in my wife's office with the curtains drawn. I observed several agents, through cracks in the curtains, removing ceiling tiles and pulling wires from the ceiling. The burglary had obviously been carried out by the F.B.I. with listening devicesplaced in the office.
On the day of the search, Janice, Attorney Sherwin Zaban and Jose Perez met at Jack's Restaurant in Skokie, where Perez indicated that he was in possession of a tape recorder issued to him by Agent John Shoup of the F.B.I. Perez said that he was told to gather additional audiotape evidence on James and Janice. Perez said that he could not do this since he was responsible for what had occurred and gave the recorder to Attorney Zaban. Perez returned to the south side office and several employees called to advise that Perez was going around saying that everything was his fault and he got too greedy! The following day Attorney Zaban was contacted by Agent John Shoup and requested the return of the tape recorder, indicating to laban that "we had something that belonged to them". Attorney laban returned the tape recorder to the F.B.I. at their Chicago Office.

Attorney Matthew Kennelly, who was later sworn in as a Federal District Judge, initially represented Jose Perez. Attorney Zaban related a conversation in which Perez told him about all of the undercover audiotapes that he had been on. According to Zaban, Attorney Kennelly said that Perez admitted his guilt to him and was remorseful of what had occurred. (23)

A. MONKEY VIRUS
Within a few days after the search, a request was made to Federal Bureau of Investigation for a downloaded disk of our employees in order for us to make our payroll. This was necessary, since the Federal Bureau ofInvestigation seized our computers with the information essential in order to make payroll.
When the Federal Bureau ofInvestigation became aware of the existence of a computer they had not seized, they couriered the requested disk to us, only this disk did not contain a list of employees, but rather a powerful "monkey virus" which destroyed the hard drive of our computer expert, Matthew Aldaka. Mr. Aldaka was one of the witnesses called during the 2002 trial by the government who testified about the existence of the Monkey Virus and what had occurred. Exhibit 19.
B. MONARCH SECURITY
It was difficult to try and run a business after you are devastated by what had occurred, which demolished your business, as you know it. After the final payroll was made at Federal Security, attempts were made to continue operating under the license of Monarch Security, Inc. Several members of our former staff at Federal were kept employed in an effort to acquire accounts. Monarch did obtain some accounts such as Walgreen's and Aldi's Food Stores with other smaller accounts requiring less manpower. These accounts were contacted by the government and were subsequently lost after government interference.
(24)

C. MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT
In 1999, while we were running Monarch Security, we were involved in a very serious motor vehicle accident that left us with lasting injuries. A driver who had just left a liquor store pulled out in front of us causing us to slam directly into him. Both of us hit the windshield which resulted in momentary unconsciousness. Janice broke her nose and herniated the discs in her back and neck. She ruptured a blood vessel in her head and both of us suffered some short-term memory loss.
There were months of therapy followed by numerous visits to several doctors and hospitals for ongoing tests. It was a difficult period and another hurdle that we would have to climb in this ordeal that we had been placed in.
What made it worse was the fact that the car we were driving afforded us little protection from serious injury. It was a GEO Metro, which was the only car I could afford after our other vehicles were seized by the government. We are still feeling the effects of the injuries and will still feel them for years to come.
D. WALGREENS
Netols told Samuels that one of ' 'their clients", Walgreens, made a complaint that Monarch Security was over billing them for guard services. Monarch filed a lawsuit against Walgreens that requested damages for the termination of the contract and to discover the
25
circumstances surrounding this mysterious statement of how they arrived at being a client of the u.s. Attorney's Office, and why Walgreens would contact the U.S. Attorney's Office to make a complaint. My immediate response was, since when did Walgreen's become a client of the US Government? Exhibit 20.
E. LAWSUITS
Lawsuits were abounding after Federal Security closed, one of which was the suit by the City of Chicago over the controversial Head Tax. Another was the lawsuit from Admiral Insurance Company that was filed before our closing that was being litigated in front of Magistrate, now Judge, Ronald Guzman, who also signed the search warrants for Federal Security in 1994. During a settlement conference with Judge Guzman, he attempted to get Admiral to accept a figure of $150,000 stating that he couldn't understand how an insurance company could be suing for a million dollars in premiums, when the coverage amounted to a million dollars. Needless to say, we did too!
We found our answer to that question in documents discovered after the triaL when it was revealed that Admiral Insurance Company and their attorneys were acting as an extension of the investigative arm of the government. They were in direct communication with the FBI, and correspondence dated October 11, 1995 between them was discovered after trial on July 30, 2002, during access to the evidence room at the US Attorney's Office. Exhibit 21.
In December 1994, my Father passed away in Appleton, Wisconsin. It was difficult to put the best face on when I spoke to him at his bedside, and tried to answer questions about what it was that was happening. It was hard trying to explain the events as best I could and regret that more pleasant topics could not have been discussed with him, instead of these last moments in his life devoted to what never should have happened.
26

F. HENRY PAWLIK C.P.A.
Attorney Steven Molo coordinated the rapidly unfolding events and de-briefed our accountant Henry Pawlik after his appearances before the Grand Jury. Exhibit 22. We were unaware of the magnitude of what Pawlik had done and the money that was embezzled, by him, from Federal Security. It wasn't until 1999 that Brian Netols informed our attorney that Pawlik was indicted for underreporting his income, and not for the money taken from Federal Security that was earn1arked for taxes. By then, it was too late to pursue initiating charges for the money lost from this embezzlement, since the government conveniently waited until the statue of limitations expired for those charges to have been made. While Pawlik was being questioned before the Grand Jury, the government failed to inform that same Grand Jury that he is under investigation for the theft of tax money they are seeking to indict Federal Security for not paying!
We also learned that Pawlik was allowed to travel and work in Las Vegas where he assisted in the murder of Bruce Fisher on December 14, 1997. Exhibit 23. This was done with the full knowledge and approval of the government. Pawlik was sentence to 10 years in Las Vegas for his role in the murder. Exhibit 24.
During our trial. the government objected to the Defense calling him as a witness and removed him from the Metropolitan Correctional Center and transferred him to Las Vegas before the trial was over. The government even hid evidence of the total amount of money Pawlik stole from us by not producing a check attria1, in the amount of $17,711.55, which would have resulted in the imposition of more time on his sentence. Exhibit 25. Pawlik had just completed the last of his probation for Securities Fraud, which was another reason the government waited to indict him! In 2000, a civil lawsuit was initiated to recover monies intended to pay taxes that were lost through the embezzlement of the monies that were taken by Pawlik. Exhibit 26.    (27)
G. WINSTON & STRAWN
After the indictment, we tried to obtain counsel to represent us. Since all of our assets were seized, there was no money to pay for legal representation. We spoke to several attorneys, but all wanted money that we didn't have. Some property was returned to us under substitute assets, so that we could sell these properties in order to afford legal representation. During this time, several continuances were given and several other attorneys appeared on our behalf to represent us. Many were interviewed, but would not file their appearance without a large retainer. Attorney Steven Molo stayed on the case to represent Janice and Patrick Cotter from Arnstein and Lehr represented James.
Mr. Malo referred to some strange incidents during the time he was employed as our attorney. In one, he said that a law clerk he sent to download files from our computers at the US Attorney's Office had discovered files that were entered after the computers were seized from our offices. Exhibit 27. He told us that the clerk decided to discontinue his work and return to the law office. Another was when Brian Netols called him and asked if we needed help in tiling our 1995 income taxes.
The following month, Brian Netols called Attorney Patrick Cotter to say that Janice's Uncle Guido from New York had gone to the residence of our forn1er vice president, Jose Perez and threatened him. Mr. Cotter was told that Janice doesn't have an uncle by the name of Guido nor does she have any relatives in New York. Mr. Cotter was told by Netols that ifshe does, to have Janice tell her uncle to "stop contacting Perez".
28

On December 16, 1997, Netols, FBI Agent Timothy Hepperman and Ms. Sluder from the U.S. Marshals Office attended my divorce hearing at the Daley Center in Chicago. Netols testified under oath that he was there pursuant to Subpoena, but he couldn't produce one. He arrived at the Daley Center within twenty minutes of being contacted by Attorney Simkin who represented my former wife. Exhibit 28.
H. DEMAND FOR PAYMENT
The monies owed us by the CHA were being withheld and letters were being written that requested, then demanded, payment for invoices submitted. Exhibit 29. Several attorneys had written letters also but to no avail. The matter reached its peak when Attorney Tommy Brewer contacted CHA Legal Counsel Jerome Butler for payment and was told that if the U.S. Attorney's Office had no objection then the invoices would be paid.
Attorney Brewer contacted Brian Netols who told Brewer that, "if they (the CHA) owe it, then they owe it". Brewer called Butler who said that the invoices would not be paid without an order from a court, because he didn't want to be embarrassed if the government decided to prosecute Federal. This prompted a lawsuit for the money in the Circuit Court of Cook County on April 24, 1997 under Case # 97 L 04758. Exhibit 30.

Three months later, we were indicted and U.S. Attorney James Burns held a news conference. This would be his last news conference before he would announce his candidacy for Governor of Illinois. He was, however, leaving to work for the law firm of Sidley and Austin. Interestingly enough, Sidley and Austin was retained to handle the walkout of our guards from the CHA in 1992. They were also retained to assist in attempts to obtain overtime payments that were withheld from us. Our Attorney, Brian Gold, had our complete financial records and files as relate to our business. Mr. Gold also represented us before the Illinois Department of Professional Regulation in their efforts to discipline us over the walkout. Our company also provided private detective work for Sidley and Austin.
29

IV. PROSECUTORIAL CRIMINAL CONDUCT
On July 23, 1997, we were arrested in the back of our attorney's office, Mr. Frank Howard, on Northwest Highway in Chicago. We were transported first to our residence at 7620 W. Foster Avenue, in Chicago where Janice surrendered her engagement ring to the FBI, then to the Dirksen Federal Building where we appeared before Magistrate Ashman. Our attorneys at Winston & Strawn were not notified of an indictment and we were held for the next three days at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Chicago. On Friday, July 25, 1997, after 3 days in custody, Magistrate Ashman ordered us to be released.
What we were unaware ot: was that the FBI and other government agents, were in our home for those three (3) consecutive days without search warrants! We had known this early on, because this is what we were told by an employee who was given the keys to our house for safekeeping, after the FBI arrested us and transported to our residence. The FBI and other government agents came to our offices, which were directly next door, at 7628 and 7630 W, Foster, Chicago, and ordered the employee to unlock the door to our house. We were told that when the alarm to our house went off, an agent answered the phone from the alarm company and identified himself. It was always the presumption that there were search warrants.
30

At the start of our trial, in opening statements by Assistant United States Attorney Brian Netols, it was revealed to us that there were never any search warrants for their numerous entries. Exhibit 31. Netols, quickly hid the photographs of the interior of our house that were to be presented to the jury, under a file jacket. Attorney Samuels asked Netols for the Search Warrants, in response to a request from my wife for them. He replied, " There are none"! Samuels was told to inform the Judge and move for a mistrial, but he told us "don't worry about them". Not until July 30, 2004, over two (2) years after the triaL would a personal handwritten note from Netols be discovered that also authorized, "covert searches o(cars". Exhibit 32.
Also discovered was a memorandum which indicated that Judge Moran would need guidance in his questioning of us because Netols was concerned that Judge Moran would be unable to ask the correct questions. Exhibit 33.
How, in God's Name, can a person be convicted in a Court of Law in this Country when the evidence against them is not subjected to fundamental scrutiny?
A. AUDIOTAPES
In December of 1997, Attorney Elliot Samuels was retained to represent us. He agreed to take payments instead of a large up front sum of money. During that month of December 1997, Samuels called me to his offices in order to review numerous audiotapes and transcripts given to him by the government.
31
I discovered two telephone conversations recorded by F.B.I. Agents John Shoup and Timothy Hepperman, which purported to be of myself speaking to a Richard Kozak, and another of my wife speaking to Jose Perez, our former Vice President.
I immediately knew that the transcripts of the calls were manufactured and falsified and confirmed this with my wife, as relates to her conversation as well. Samuels brought in a tape player and played the tapes twice. He stated repeatedly that the voices sounded like my wife and L and that he was convinced they were us.
Samuels told me to locate a forensic expert named Steve Cain, who he had previous contact with, but not to discuss details of what was discovered. I was able to find Mr. Cain and give him some very basic information along with the name of Attorney Samuels.
Samuels called Steve Cain of Applied Forensic Technologies and told me that he was sending the tapes to his laboratory near Lake Geneva Wisconsin, and that it would cost $2,000.00 for a preliminary examination, since we did not have the original audiocassettes.
Several days later, I was contacted by Samuels, who said that he had received a call from Cain, who advised that the audiotapes were tampered with and several tape recorders were specifically used to make my recording. Exhibit 34.
During the following months, I insisted that we proceed to examine the original tape recordings and inform the court of our findings. Samuels insisted that we wait until trial and "spring it on them at that time". I told him I strongly disagreed with him and told him that this was evidence of criminal conduct by the U.S. Attorney, F.B.I. or both and it made no sense not to inform the court.
As the months progressed, discussions of these tape recordings became a heated subject between Samuels and myself. Samuels constantly said that the tapes don't mean a thing because they are exculpatory. I told to him that they may sound exculpatory, but they are manufactured and are not my conversation or that of my wife. He told me Cain wanted $6000 to test the original tapes.
32

Several weeks passed during which he made several comments about the $6,000 for Cain being in his special account and asked repeatedly, if we wanted it returned to us. I kept telling him to go ahead and order the tapes to be tested because that was what the $6,000 was for. I also told him that there might be an additional audio or videotape of a meeting between myself, Kozak, Public Safety Director Christian Maerz and Chicago Housing Director Barbara Davis that had not been provided to us. I told him this repeatedly, then after several months he finally told me that there might be an additional tape of a meeting that had not been provided to us. It would not be until November of2001 that this tape was given to us, approximately sixty days before trial.
After repeated discussions with Samuels about the examinations of the original audiotapes, an agreement was made with Brian Netols and Samuels, that the audiotapes could be examined at the F.B.I oflices in Chicago. Samuels said that Netols refused to allow the audiotapes to be taken to Steve Cain's laboratory in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin.
Cain was told that he would have to come to Chicago with his equipment to perform the tests. Cain couldn't understand why the tapes could not be taken to his laboratory, since it is only an hour and half drive from Chicago. I related this information to Samuels and he said that Netols was adamant about the subject, and that was only way the tapes could be tested. I told Samuels to obtain a court order for the analysis to be done at the laboratory and he said that he had an agreement with Netols, and that there would be no need for a Court Order. Samuels further assured me that he "guaranteed" the testing would be done.
33
When Cain arrived in Chicago on August 30, 2001, he was not allowed to do the testing that was previously agreed to. Exhibit 35. No tape recorders were given to him for analysis and he was not allowed to perform standard chemical testing of the original audiotape. He made copies of the tapes and left.
When I spoke to Samuels about what has happened, I was given no explanation. told Samuels that this is why I insisted on a Court Order in the first place and I was concerned that I had lost $6,000.00 because of this incident. Samuels said he would speak with Cain and call me.
When Samuels spoke to me again, he was angry because Cain would not re-do the testing for free but would charge $4,000.00. He suggested we contact another expert regarding the testing and I told him that there were others who were on the Internet, one coming to mind being Anthony Pellicano.
B. ANTHONY PELLICANO, AUDIOTAPE EXPERT
I placed a call to Pellicano in Los Angeles and briefly explained what had occurred.
Pellicano asked for the telephone number of my attorney and placed a conference call to Samuels while I was on the line.
Pellicano said that he does work for the F.B.I. all the time and that they routinely send the tapes, wherever they are to the F.B.I. offices in Los Angeles and transport them to his laboratory. He said he would do the tests on the audiotapes for $2,500.00 at which time this conversation concluded and we were to get back to him on the matter.
Several days elapsed in which I place calls to Pellicano along with Samuels who did the same. None of the calls to Pellicano were returned to Samuels or myself. During this time, I had occasion to speak to future co-counsel Mr. Tommy Brewer, who suggested recontacting Cain in order to see if the fee could be lowered and more importantly, "keep the continuity of forensic experts".
34

I contacted Cain and he said that he would re-examine the tapes for $3,500.00, only if they were transported to his laboratory in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin. I told him I would make arrangements and would insist on a Court Order signed by Judge Moran to make sure they were delivered.
Shortly after this conversation with Cain, Samuels called me with Pellicano on the line and Pellicano told me that "he took the liberty of contacting the U.S. Attorney and the F.B.I. in Chicago, and made arrangements to have the audiotapes transported to his laboratory in Los Angeles, California". I said that both Samuels and I had tried to contact him by telephone and we had not received a return call, myself calling him three times. Pellicano said that he was aware we called and I only called him twice. I said, be that as it may, but we had decided to preserve the continuity of the testing and allow Cain to conduct the chemical and other testing at his laboratory. I told him we would contact him if we needed his services. With that, Pellicano abruptly said, "he was out of this," and hung up the phone.
After the conversation with Pellicano, I told Samuels to obtain the necessary Court Order on the two audiotapes. During that time, a third audiotape was given to him in November of 200 1. This audiotape was the one I had been referring to throughout the previous three years that Samuels represented us. It was only given to us after it was discovered that it had been played before the Grand Jury. After I read the transcript and listened to the tape, I immediately informed Samuels that this tape was also created and fabricated.
35

In December 2002, Pellicano was indicted by a Federal Orand Jury of charges relating to his representation of actor Steven Segal and threats made to a Los Angeles Times Reporter. When agents raided his office in Los Angeles they seized explosives and hand grenades along with several handguns. Exhibit 36.
A few months before this occurred, Pellicano was finally exposed by attorneys representing the parents of a kidnapped baby in Florida, Samantha Aisenberg. Pellicano was selected by the government as an expert against the parents surrounding audiotapes the government obtained of their conversations. When Pellicano testified, he admitted being a high school dropout with only a OED and no formal education, whatsoever, in electronics or audiotape analysis. In fact, Pellicano understood nothing about the scientific, mathematical or technological questions asked of him nor understood anything concerning the equipment he was using. Exhibit 37. Pellicano was recently featured on the CBS evening series 48 Hours relative to the Aisenberg kidnapping case. Exhibit 38.
Pellicano was also called by the US Attorney in Birmingham Alabama during a forty year old civil rights case to testify about conversations that occurred where. He testified that there was an additional person in the room with the alleged offender and his wife. This was significant because not even the FBI Laboratory in Quantico, Virginia was able to decipher much less determine that a third voice existed! Exhibit 39.
36
C. COURT ORDER
On January 2,2002, Judge Moran signed an Order for the testing of the now three audiotapes, requiring the F.B.I. to bring the tapes; recording devices along with inventory sheets, maintenance records and log sheets to the laboratory of Cain, in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin. Samuels told me to deal with Cain personally and to pay his fee directly.
I spoke to Cain and he agreed to examine the three tapes for an additional $6,000.00 that I borrowed from my family. I went to Lake Geneva and brought him a check along with a copy of the third tape, which I initially received from Samuels.
January 9, 2002, Janice and I arrived at the Lake Geneva office at 9:30 A.M. We arrived early because Cain said he could spend some time with us. No one was in his office and he told us that all of his stan' was sick. I gave Cain copies of the transcript of the tapes, a letter of understanding, a copy of a letter written to my attorney, Elliot Samuels dated January 7, 2002 and a letter describing in detail, the areas of all three tapes that were in question, and a copy of the stipulation my wife and I signed. Exhibit 40.
Cain quickly read the letter and I then gave him the cassette tape previously given to me by Samuels. Cain said that this is a "Nagra tape". He began to explain what a Nagra tape was, because we were totally unfamiliar with that term.
Cain said that the tape was made with a Nagra Tape recorder, which was a recorder used exclusively by law enforcement. He said he would need the tape recorder to do his analysis but had access to Nagra recorders from his friends at the State Police and could get one if he needed it.
He placed the cassette into his tape machine, which was connected to an Oscilloscope type monitor. Cain immediately exclaimed, "This is a 5th generation copy!"
37
He then pointed out areas of stop/starts and edits. He then took the tape out of the machine and turned it over and placed it back into the tape machine and said "There are erasures and over recordings here". He showed us the wavelengths on his monitor and said, "See, the center wavelengths indicate over recording", He also said, "If I see these on the originals, you win".
Cain had to periodically stop the process to answer the phones. On every call he would tell the caller that he could not talk now because he was with "an attorney".
He stopped the process and said, I have to get a hold of Elliott and tell him about what I found. I used his telephone and called Samuels and left him a message to call Cain immediately because of his findings.
I gave Cain a six thousand dollar ($6,000.00) check and he said that he would have to verify the check to see if it was good. He made an attempt to do that in our presence but was unsuccessful. I later found out that this was due to the bank being closed because it was Wednesday. Cain finally demonstrated the chemical testing method on a sample tape that he had in his office. He started and stopped a sample tape. made a marking on the tape with a black marker and placed the tape under a microscope which was connected to a television monitor. He sprayed a substance on the tape and showed us the start and stop signatures. He then placed the tape back into the tape recorder and played it saying, "see, it doesn't destroy the tape". He said that he alwavs makes a copy of the originals, before he places this substance on a tape. Before we left Cain's office. I asked him where there was a good place to eat.
38
He looked at his watch (11 :30 A.M.) and said "come with me, I think they're open now".
We followed Cain to the rear of his office and he pointed to a restaurant outside of the window called Popeye's and said that they have the best food in Lake Geneva. 1 asked him to join us but he declined and said he was the only one at his office and had to answer the telephones. We lett his office and decided not to have lunch at Popeye's, because it was still too early to eat. We decided to travel to Milwaukee and have lunch at Maders. Before leaving Lake Geneva, I discovered that] had forgotten my file at Cain's office. I returned, retrieved my file, apologized for the interruption and left.
On January 11, 2002 I received a call from Cain asking if I could expedite the clearing of the check. I offered to bring him a Cashiers Check later in the day and asked him if I could meet him or one of his staff to exchange checks. He put his secretary, Jody Brock on the telephone with me and we arranged to meet at Popeye's Restaurant that evening to switch checks. We delayed leaving Chicago, because my wife was looking at records at the U.S. Attorney's office. Jody Brock had given me he cellular telephone number earlier (262-949-3663) And told me to call her when we were on our way.
We finally arrived at Popeye's at approximately 7:30 P.M. where we met Jody Brock and her husband Bob. We had some drinks with them at the bar, and Jody Brock kept saying over and over "I don't know why he's doing this to you. He never does this to anyone and I don't like him doing this to you. He has gotten checks from you and your lawyer before and I don't think this is right." I told her I didn't mind brushing it off and Janice said, "look Jody, if we didn't come up here we wouldn't have met you. We stayed for about an hour and went back to Chicago.
39
On January 14,2002 at approximately 2:00 P.M., I received a call from Samuels. He told me that he spoke to Cain and all three tapes were clean. I asked Samuels for Cain's telephone number and told him 1 would call him.
I called Cain and spoke to Jody Brock, who said that Cain would be right back because he was out making some keys. I asked Jody what happened with the tapes and she said, "I think Steve found something, but you'll have to talk to him". I told her 1 would call him back shortly.
I went to my scheduled appointment with my doctor and called Cain back at about 3:00 P.M. When I called back, Cain answered the telephone and I asked him what happened. He told me "I tested all three tapes and they were clean". I said how could that be when you found all of these problems with the tape given to me by Samuels. He said "1 don't know what to tell you, but everything checks out". I said did you check the Nagra tape? He said "yes I did". He further stated that there is slim chance that something could be found if he had the Nagra tape recorder but that it would require the spending of additional money and it was his opinion that I would be wasting both time and money.
D. SECOND AUDIOTAPE EXPERT
On January 16, 2002, I contacted Mr. Herbert Joe J.D. of Yonovitz and Joe, Audiotape Specialists. I described what had happened at length and Mr. Joe advised me to federal Express everything to him.
A telephone call was place to Cain on the afternoon of January 16, 2002 requesting the tapes. Cain said that Samuels would have to write a letter to him authorizing him to release the tapes. I called Samuels and he said he would fax the letter to Cain.
40

The following day, January 17,2002, I called Cain and asked ifhe had received the letter. He immediately told me "this is a bad day, I'm moving, and I 'm in depositions". I told Cain I needed the tapes and his reports and I was in route to his location. He told me the letter from Samuels was not received. I called Samuels, who apologized and said it was being faxed within a few minutes.
I called Cain about an hour later and he advised that he had the letter and stated He would not have anything left in his file if I picked up these tapes. I said I was aware of that and told him that there should be eight (8) tapes to be picked up in case he was not there, two tapes of copies that were sent to him by Samuels in 1998, two tapes that he made in 200 I, one Nagra copy I left with him on January 9, 2002 and the three tapes he made just recently. He said, "I don't know how many are here but you can pick them up.

I went to Cain's office in Lake Geneva and arrived there at about 3:30 P.M. I was met by an employee by the name of Joyce as she and I were walking into the outside front entrance. We both went upstairs where I saw empty offices where Cain once had his equipment, Joyce went into the back and brought out a Federal Express carton containing the following: (1) two copies of the 1998 tapes sent by Mr. Samuels, (2) one copy of the August 2001 tapes made in Chicago, presumably with both copies on it, (3) one copy of the sample tape given to him on January 9,2002 with the words "Nagra" on it and (4) one additional tape described as Q-3. I told Joyce that there should be eight tapes not five. I asked her. where are the copies of the original telephone conversations? She said, "he didn't make copies of those tapes".
Joyce handed me a copy of the laboratory report dated January 15,2002 and for the first time I became aware that Cain did not perform the tests he said he had done.
I asked Joyce where I could find Cain. She said he might be at the new office at 638 Main, which was down the street.
I went to the new location and was told by a female employee that he was gone for the day and she had no way of contacting him. I asked her if she could make a copy of the report Joyce gave me and she declined. I left and went to the real estate otTice down stairs and gave the girl a dollar to copy the two-page report.
I immediately contacted Samuels and faxed him the laboratory report which Cain sent to his previous address at 181 West Madison, Chicago, III inois. Cain lied, both in his oral representations to Samuels and myself. He never made any chemical tests of the tapes and cleverly disguised this in his laboratory report. Cain said in his January 15,2002 laboratory report in the last paragraph that S.A.
DeWick provided an original Nagra tape together with a cassette copy that Agent DeWick identified, (emphasis added), had been made of the Nagra tape contents. Cain further said, No Examination was ever performed on the original Nagra tape"! This, after he told both Samuels and myself that he did.
On page two he said, I was not aware that the Q-3 tape was a Nagra recording until so advised by S.A. DeWick. This was a blatant lie, because he was given the Nagra copy by me on January 9,2002 at his otTice, where he explained what a Nagra tape was to both my wife and myself.
42
Under Results of Examination, paragraph one, Cain cleverly refers to magnetic development in his January 14, 2001 letter. There is no reference to magnetic development in his January 14, 2001 letter other than the fact that he was not allowed to do it by the F.B.I., when he was in Chicago in August. He never made copies of the original tapes allegedly brought to him by S.A.
DeWick. He could not rely on copies he made in Chicago in August 2001, because he could not be sure they were the same tapes. He makes no mention of any previous findings in the third tape of edits, erasures and over recordings as he said to us on January 9,2002.
After we found out that Cain did not examine the third tape, Samuels called Netols in the presence of myself, my wife, Attorney Tommy Brewer and Attorney Eric Ferleger and confirmed that the Nagra Tape Recorder was not brought to Lake Geneva as provided for in the Court Order. It was at this time that a second forensic audio expert was contacted to test the third tape. The firm of Yonovitz and Joe from Dallas, Texas was selected to perform the testing.
I arranged a conference call between Mr. Herbert Joe, Samuels and myself so as to coordinate the testing and to introduce Mr. Joe, also an attorney, to Samuels. Samuels was irritated by this call and informed Mr. Joe that he was more concerned with the case than of the audiotapes, stating that there were only a total of sixteen pages of Grand Jury testimony relating to them.
Mr. Joe asked me to send him copies of any tape I had in my possession and to send him the tapes previously submitted to Cain. I went to Lake Geneva and signed a release for the tapes, which were sent directly to Mr. Joe for preliminary analysis. A two thousanddollar retainer was also sent.                                               (43)
After Mr. Joe received the material, he called me and asked me if! was aware of the different stop and start times of the phone call involving Janice and Jose Perez. Mr. Joe stated that Agent John Shoup of the F.B.I. indicates the phone started at 9:48 A.M. and ended at 9:45 A.M., three minutes before the start of the conversation. He also pointed out that there appeared to be two, one-minute audio tapes that were previously not submitted to us. I confirmed this with Samuels, who agreed to obtain these two additional tapes for analysis.
Another Court Order was obtained from Judge Moran requiring the government to provide the recording devices, inventory sheets, maintenance records and logbooks for analysis for the three plus, two additional audiotapes of short duration, by the firm of Yonovitz and Joe. The cost of this analysis was $10,600.00, which I again borrowed from my family.
E. TESTING CONTINUES
During a break in the trial, Mr. Joe traveled to Chicago to perform his testing. We picked him up from O'Hare Field and transported him to the Hilton Hotel where we were met by Attorney Tommy Brewer to discuss the testing itinerary for the following day at the F.B.I. office located at 200 West Adams.
The following morning my wife and I transported Mr. Joe to the F.B.I. offices where we met Attorney Brewer. We were not permitted to observe the testing but were told to sit in the waiting area.                                                                                                          44

The testing and copying of the tapes was delayed for some time because Agent John DeWick had to obtain a Nagra Tape Recorded from the F.B.I. office in Elgin, Illinois so as to play the tape and allow it to be copied. This was not the original tape recorder used to make the original tape. No tape recording devices were provided to Mr. Joe for any of the tapes, nor any previous tapes recorded by the same recorder form comparative analysis. Likewise, no inventory, sign in, sign out, log books, chain of custody or maintenance records were provided as contained in Judge Moran's Court Order.
Mr. Joe left Chicago to examine the tapes, which lasted several days. During this time Netols repeatedly paged Brewer to ascertain the results for test. A final report issued by Professor Yonovitz found no abnormalities in the tapes, citing the lack of recording devices and other documentation that were not provided per the Court Order. Exhibit 41.
F. THIRD AUDIOTAPE EXPERT
Professor Yonovitz said that a digitally enhanced audiotape could be made which would be undetectable and he would recommend that one final analysis be done to compare the results arrived by Cain himself. He recommended a forensic expert named Barry Dickey, who had the equipment to do the final analysis. I contacted Mr. Dickey, who agreed to perform the comparison for $2,500.00. Mr. Dickey needed the work product previously done by Cain and requested I contact him.
45
When I contacted Cain, I was told he would not give his work product to anyone. relayed this information to Mr. Dickey, who advised that he has gotten work product from Cain in the past and was currently working on cases originating with Cain that he has
received work product. I suggested to Mr. Dickey that he contact Cain himself and received a call back that he was surprised that Cain would not cooperate as he had with other cases. Another Court Order was signed by Judge Moran requiring Cain to release his work product and I requested through co-counsel Brewer that I be allowed to travel to Lake Geneva to serve the order and obtain the documentation. There was an objection by the U.S. Attorney and Judge Moran decided to have the order faxed for compliance. Netols and FBI Agent DeWick testified before Judge Moran that they "lost the tape recorders used to make the audiotapes and had no supporting documentation" because the "case was so old". Mr. Dickey was unable to find any abnormalities or differences with what was done by the two forensic experts. Total cost to analyze these tapes amounted to $27,000.00.

How, in God's Name, can a person be convicted in a Court of Law in this Country when the evidence against them is not subjected to fundamental scrutiny? The excuses by Netols were an obvious cover up that was evidenced in the documentation that we have obtained as seen in following exhibits. Netols directly violated Brady and violated every Court Order that was issued surrounding these audiotapes. He knew fully well that requested and Court Ordered documentation existed, and deliberately withheld any of these records from the defense. This was evident from every attempt to secure basic, fundamental records of what tape recorder was used to tape a conversation. Netols knew that if these recorders were turned over to the defense, it would show that the tapes were manufactured and it would have been proven.
46
G. KOZAK RE-CALLED
During the triaL my attorney was able to question Rick Kozak, who wore the Tape Recorder, one of the last tapes to be provided sixty days earlier. In sworn testimony, Kozak said he never met me, even though I am heard saying at the start of the tape that we met already. Kozak later said that I was pointed out to him by the Secret Service during a visit by then President Clinton to Chicago, which doesn't explain why I would say "we met already", if I never laid eyes on him before in my life! The latter testimony was given after questioning by Netols, after Kozak was recalled at the end of the triaL
In December 2004, a letter was received from the United States Secret Service in response to a Freedom of Information Request, which indicated that the Secret Service Agent in Charge, Desmond Scanlan had no memory of me or any incident surrounding the visit by the President of the United States. There was no written report prepared as would have been done if there were any occurrences affecting the President.
Attorney Brewer asked Kozak how I could enter the office where the meeting was being held, unescorted, unannounced, precisely when Kozak turned the tape recorder on, making the whole event a PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY! Two other participants, who were unaware the meeting was being recorded, were also in the room and not one word was uttered to anyone in the office until I walked in, not even a hello to a person I knew for three years.
Kozak testified that he could not explain how that happened, that maybe he or Director Maerz escorted me into the office. This incredible testimony from a man heard in a meticulous prologue, walking in a room, sitting down, not saying a thing to anyone when I immediately appear in the office and the very first words out of mouth are "we met already"!
47
It makes no sense that I would expend a substantial amount of time and expense retaining experts to authenticate these tapes, if they were not manufactured and falsified. All of this money ($27,000) was wasted because of non-compliance with numerous Court Orders
On June 27, 2004 and July 30,2004, access was gained to the US Attorney's Office where several boxes of documents were examined. Located in those boxes were documents previously Court Ordered that were never turned over to the Defense, such as summary sheets, tape recorder malfunctions, evidence of enhancements, Electronic Surveillance (ELSUR) files and Airtels of surveillance photographs. Exhibit 42.
H. IRS AGENT JOSE FRANCO
Approximately a year after we were indicted, I met my friend Thomas Ryan at a local restaurant, who told me that he and another friend of mine, Larry Kelly, were golfing with IRS Special Agent Jose Franco. Franco began relating Grand Jury information and details of his investigation into our company and us personally. Franco was obviously unaware of my relationship with the two other members of his foursome.
When Franco introduced himself, he initially told Ryan and Kelly that he was a Secret Service Agent who guards the President of the United States. He later told Ryan and Kelly that he really worked for the IRS. Franco told them that he occasionally guards the President when the Secret Service is short of manpower.
Franco told Ryan and Kelly that he was going to trial in the next few weeks on the Skrzypeks' and Federal Security. He told them that the Federal Bureau oflnvestigation calls him into an investigation in order to make a case if they can't do it. Franco told them, in detail, how our assets were seized in order to "weaken us so we would t be able to afford an attorney".

48
While the trial was underway, my attorney told me that I would be unable to use this information so I decided to initiate a formal complaint with the Treasury Department in Chicago.
I provided the information, along with the enclosed photograph in February 2002, showing Franco on the right, taken at the outing and directions to his home in Elgin, Illinois to Case Agent Paul Finer, who told me it would be assigned to Agent John Idleburg with case #66-0203-0001-C. All of this was done in February 2002. To date I have heard nothing about my complaint. Exhibit 43.
I. SELECTIVE PROSECUTION
During the time before trial, we discovered an FBI 302 that was given to us that described criminal activity by another security company T-Force Security in Chicago. Exhibit 44. T-Force was one of the companies, along with GEl and Digby Security that were mentioned throughout the depositions and court testimony in Guardian/Triad v. Chicago Housing Authority.
As reflected in earlier exhibits, these companies were found to have been defrauding the Chicago Housing Authority long before we came to the Authority and were, nevertheless, allowed to provide security service to the housing developments. In fact, Inspector General Christian Maerz testified that these discoveries were made in 1988, when he started at the CHA.
49
There emerged a pattern that we were unaware of which placed us on a collision course. There were. undoubtedly. previous plans for us that were already in place by CHA hierarchy which insured that a white owned company would be taken down. thus diverting the real attention away from those companies already found to have been committing fraud.
J. ATTORNEY JAMES KOCH
While undergoing medical tests at Resurrection Hospital in Chicago. James is contacted by Attorney James Koch. who indicates that Brian Netols is a friend of his and that Netols would like to make a deal. Attorney Koch was referred earlier by another attorney who suggested that he would be able to handle a lawsuit involving the employees of the 1992 walkout, who had signed falsified affidavits prepared by Board Attorney Richard Paz of the National Labor Relations Board in Chicago. Koch's only involvement in the labor case was obtaining court reported witness statements from two of the participants.
Exhibit 45.
James spoke to Koch from the hospital and informed him that no deals would be forthcoming because there was nothing that we did wrong. When Attorney Samuels was informed, he said that there could be problems with Netols having someone contact me, but took no further action.
V. TRIAL
50
The trial began on January 29, 2002 with jury selection on both January 28th and 29^{th. While arriving to Court on the second day. James injures his back. Permission is granted by Judge Moran to go to Northwestern Hospital for treatment.}
At Northwestern Hospital, I am given an MRI and admitted to the hospital for four days, after it is discovered that there is serious back injuries. During that time, intravenous feedings of Dilaudid and Norco were given for pain. While in the hospital, calls were received by Judge Moran. Medical records were released from Northwestern Hospital under subpoena. I was released with several prescriptions for Dilaudid, Norco and Flexeril to name a few.
A nurse was sent to my home on February 3, 2002 to examine me and set up a schedule for therapy treatments. A therapist arrived at my residence on February 3, 2002. Judge Moran called me at home to determine my condition.
On February 6, 2002, I arrived at my doctor's office at Northwestern Hospital for an appointment. I was re-examined and given a refill of my current medications. I was then given a referral for a neurosurgeon, whom I contacted the following day for an appointment.
A. DR. MARTIN LANOFF
I received a Court Order from my attorney signed by Judge Moran to submit to a medical examination by Dr. Martin Lanoff in Chicago on February 11,2002 at 10:00 A.M.
When I arrived at Dr. Lanoffs office, I requested that my wife be with me in the examination room. but was told by Dr. Lanoff she could not. Dr. Lanoff explained that he never does any work for Attorneys much less the United States Attorney's Office, and asked me to sit down so that he could ask me some questions.       (51)
I was asked basic questions previously asked when I was in Northwestern HospitaL and I indicated that I currently had an additional problem with severe anal discomfort. After approximately fifteen minutes of questions, Dr. Lanoff asked me to remove my clothes. requested that my wife be allowed to help me and he summoned her to the examination room where she remained throughout the exam.
The examination performed by Dr. Lanoff consisted of several movements, some of which gave me pain. I was told to lie on a table, turn on my side and then lay on my back. I was told to lift my leg and perform other movements, some of which were painful. During this examination, Dr. Lanoff showed my wife a small protrusion on my lower back. He stated it was an inflammation.
I asked Dr. Lanoffto examine my rectal area because of the intense pain I was experiencing. He indicated that the area was highly inflamed with external hemorrhoids and I should consider getting the protrusions "lanced". This portion of the examination concluded after approximately fifteen minutes and I was told to get dressed.
Dr. Lanoff appeared at a hearing before Judge Moran approximately three hours later and testified that I was faking my injuries and that I never had injured myself in the first place. After the testimony from Dr. Lanoff Judge Moran revoked my bond and I was arrested by the F.B.I. at my residence. An investigation of Dr. Lanoff from the Illinois Department of Professional Regulation revealed that Dr. Lanoff was the recipient of the following complaints listed on the following page:                                                (52)

• PERJURY IN COURT TESTIMONY
• MISDIAGNOSIS
• FALSIFICATION OF RECORDS
• FAILING TO PROVIDE MEDICAL TREATMENT
• UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
• WRONGFUL DEATH
DR. MARTIN LANOFF DISCIPLINARY RECORD. (Exhibit 46).

Date
Complaint #
Name

Subject

1/9/97

199810771

Raul Gonzalez, 326 Quaker Hollow Lane.
Misdiagnosis

Round Lake, II. 60073.847-265-0292

6/16/99

199904279

Anita Kobierski, 635 Legion Dr.
Perjury in

Twin Lakes, Wi. 53181. 414-877-4406
Court

12/18/01

200108967

Ray Lee, POB 1676.

Falsified

Bolingbrook, II. 60440.

630-759-5429
Medical Info.

1/22/01

2002000536

Gregory Sievert, 656 Newport Circle,
Unprofessional

Lindenhurst, II. 60046.847-356-1806
Conduct

2/28/02

200201630

James Skrzypek, POB 56035,
Perjury

Chicago, II 60656

****

97 L 09418

Epi Wult~ DECEASED.

Wrongful

Death
MEDICAL TREATMENT
53
Dr. Lanoff has testified in other matters as a "hired gun". He was finally exposed for what he is during a deposition on May 15, 2002, in Illinois Industrial Commission Case# 00 WC 6209, James Shubalis VS. Lawson Mardon Packaging. Exhibit 47.
This deposition occurred just week after our trial was concluded. In his deposition, Dr. Lanoff is asked several questions regarding his academic credentials.
Starting on page 63 of the deposition, Dr. Lanoff's background becomes unraveled. The following summary consolidates the educational background of Dr. Lanoff and gives an indication of what he does not want to disclose. Lanoff s school attendance is sketchy at best and is not a full understanding of all of the institutions and academic courses that he took as an undergraduate student. What is contained in the following page is what his testimony reveals during his deposition.
54
DR. MARTIN LANOFF, M.D. Vernon Hills. Illinois
O.O.B. 7-30-59 S.S.N. 360-38-7667
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND / LACK OF REQUIRED CORE COURSES
1977
1978
1979
Eastern Michigan University. 37hours
Northeastern Illinois University. Vocabulary Building
Jerusalem Academy, Israel. Philosophy of Religion,
Comparative Study of Religion, Bible as Literature.

1980
1981
University of Illinois, Chicago.
University of Illinois, Champaign/U rbana
Loyola University.
University of Illinois.
Summer
One Semester.
Withdrew June 15, 1981.
SAMPLE UNDERGRADUATE ACADEMIC COURSE GRADES

1.

Elementary Organic Chemistry

C

2.

Physical Electric Mg

D

3.

Introductory Human Physiology

C

4.

Microbiology

C
FALSIFIED HOSPITAL APPLICATIONS

University Health Sciences Chicago Medical School
Loyola University Hospitals Foster G. McGaw Hospital
* University of Illinois listed as Pre- Med expenence.
* University of Illinois Champaign listed as Pre-Med experience.
55
If the academic course grades are not scary enough, Dr. Lanoff withdrew from Microbiology after he was failing the course. He barely passed the other courses. He received his medical degree from the Chicago Medical SchooL which is currently under criminal investigation and academic probation as reported in the Chicago Sun Times on June 4,2004.
Dr. Lanotf has perjured himself in other cases that he was involved in and gave testimony on. In Case# 00 L 2536 Kimberly Washington Ford and Michael Ford vs . .Jeffi~ey Winter, Dr. Lanoff perjured himself on a videotape deposition and stormed out of the room.
Dr. Lanoff has been asked how he could enter medical school with a grade point average so low. He has lied to various hospitals seeking employment. The medical school he attended is on academic probation and under criminal investigation. He has no undergraduate degree of any kind and explodes when any inquiry is made concerning his educational background. He is unable to indicate whether he even possesses the requisite mandated continuing education requirements for his profession.
Later in the trial, we were told that Netols had offered Dr. Lanoff a contract with the US Attorney's Office for his help in our case. Attorney Steven Wiser told Janice that Attorney James Koch had met an Assistant US Attorney at his son's sporting event, who had disclosed this information. Our Attorney, Elliot Samuels, was advised of this and Lanoffs complaints but did nothing.
56
B. BETHANY HOSPITAL
1 was transported to the Metropolitan Correction Center then taken to Bethany Hospital in Chicago for a medical examination before 1 was incarcerated. Before 1 was examined at Bethany Hospital, Agent DeWick of the F.B.I. advised a nurse named Adrian that he had to speak with the doctor before 1 was examined. When the doctor came into the area he asked me why I was at the hospital. I explained that 1 had been released from Northwestern Hospital and the extent of my injuries. He asked if! wanted something for pain. I indicated I did and he removed both of my socks, ran his finger up both of my feet, turned to Agent DeWick and said, "this is a little trick I learned".
Both the doctor and Agent De Wick walked a few steps away from me and De Wick handed the doctor one of his business cards and said, "lowe you". The doctor exclaimed "anytime", and handed him a piece of paper, which later turned out to be a prescription for pain medication, which never was given to me. Agent DeWick handed me a clipboard with a discharge sheet and told me to sign it.
I refused and advised him I needed to speak to my attorney before signing.
DeWick told me he would call my attorney and have him drive to the hospital if necessary at this late hour. 1 told Adrian, the nurse that 1 disagreed with the diagnosis and did not want to sign the release.
I signed the discharge form after advising De Wick with the notation "without Counsel". DeWick stated this was OK. A nurse by the name of Adrian was a witness to this. Exhibit 48.
57
DeWick later testified in Court that I was in no pain and I agreed with the diagnosis the doctor put on the hospital record as "chronic back pain", because I signed it. He made no mention that it was signed "without counsel".
I was transported back to the Metropolitan Correction Center and for the next twelve days my wife and co-defendant, Janice Skrzypek, tried to see me at the Metropolitan Correctional Center but was denied any contact, either in person or by telephone, despite a court order issued by Judge Moran requiring her to see me. At no time during my incarceration or trial did I discuss the case with my wife. Judge Moran issued other court orders for medications from the Metropolitan Correctional Center and transportation to Northwestern Hospital in Chicago to keep an appointment with a Neurosurgeon. Both were ignored. Exhibit 49.
C. METROPOLITAN CORRECTIONAL CENTER
Repeated requests for pain medications prescribed by the emergency room physician at Bethany Hospital on February 11,2002 were ignored. Exhibit 50.
Requests to see a doctor were repeatedly ignored. In one instance, a doctor came to see the other inmate I was sharing my cell with (Keith Oliver), and he requested the doctor to speak to me. This was ignored.
Requests to call my wife were ignored. No medications for my other conditions (diabetes, high blood pressure, Irritable Bowel Syndrome, high cholesterol, and asthma) were provided to me until after the second day of incarceration, and only for diabetes and high blood pressure. Exhibit 51. Blood sugar levels were taken only twice as was blood pressure. No medications were given for Irritable Bowel Syndrome, cholesterol and asthma despite complaints of shortness of breath. The prescription for pain that was prescribed at Bethany Hospital was never filled before admittance to the Metropolitan Correctional
Center. Exhibit 52.
58
D. NO COUNSEL
I had no contact with Defense Counsel Elliot Samuels because of his involvement with the trial. Co-counsel Tommy Brewer, who was retained a few weeks before trial was unable to gain access to the Metropolitan Correctional Center because he had lost his Bar Association Membership Card.

Judge Moran issued an order for the u.S. Attorney to make arrangements that I be taken to Northwestern Hospital to keep the rescheduled appointment with Dr. John Liu, Assistant Professor of Neurological Surgery, which was also ignored. While being led to a holding cell, the United States Marshal who escorted me said that the only reason I was being let out to go to the doctor was that "the Judge was wrong". After Judge Moran left the bench Assistant u.S. Attorney Brian Netols stated that they were not taking me, which resulted in my wife arriving with winter clothes and money for cab fare. I was let out of the Metropolitan Correctional Center for five hours without bond and my bond was not reinstated until the following day.

DR. JOHN LIU, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF NEUROLOGY, NORTHWESTERN MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

The findings of Dr. Liu confirmed the injuries sustained and the confinement to Northwestern Hospital as indicated in his attached letter to Judge Moran. Exhibit 53.
59
This letter was erroneously faxed to Judge Moran's Chambers by the secretary for Elliot Samuels. The letter was received and acknowledged by Judge Moran on the record and I was released shortly afterward. The conclusions of Dr. Liu were obviously based on past and current medical information and were not done as a favor to someone in order to get a job with the U.S. Attorney's Office as was previously disclosed.
F. ATTORNEY JAMES KOCH, PLEA NEGOTIATOR
While in custody. my wife was contacted by Attorney James Koch, who had previously contacted me about a plea agreement. He indicated to her that he had been in contact with Assistant United States Attorney Netols about a plea agreement.
Koch had indicated to her that he would represent her if she would fax over a waiver to his office. My wife did so and the following morning Attorney Koch was in court. My wife requested being able to discuss this with me since we had no contact in twelve days despite court orders. Koch told her that "she had to think of herself" and that it would be a much harder plea agreement after the trial started that morning. No further contact was made with attorney Koch.
G. RELEASE FROM CUSTODY
After being confined for twelve (12) days, I was released from the correctional center and had to "come up to speed" as to events that were occurring in our case.
I was at a major disadvantage, because I was unaware of what conversations took place and what details were discussed before and after trial. I attempted to discuss various issues with my wife, but everything was out of context and could not be duplicated because of what had occurred with regard to my incarceration.                             (60)

I was still somewhat disoriented after the ordeal I had been through, along with not having the prescribed medications that I had been denied. I was groggy and had to be re- acclimated to my surroundings which only added to the difficulty in putting everything together in a concise, understandable way.
FBI CASE AGENT ROBERT SHOUP AND THE FINGERPRINTS.
We made requests to our attorneys that the original FBI Case Agent, John Shoup be called to testify. In Grand Jury testimony, Agent Shoup stated that bribe money came from the third floor of our south side office located at 628 W. 47th Street in Chicago and not from the Skrzypek's. Agent Shoup also stated in Grand Jury testimony that we did not owe money on taxes if we were owed money by the government. He was never called at trial.
Agent Shoup stated that our company was not legally required to file taxes for years when there were losses. Agent Shoup gave testimony before the Grand Jury relating to a tile jacket containing information on Nancy Anderson.

Agent Shoup testified that the file was located on Janice's desk. Exhibit 54.

Agent Hepperman recounted testimony of secretary Annette Jones who testified that it was in the top drawer of Jim Skrzypek's desk. Exhibit 55.

When the FBI fingerprint expert testified, it mysteriously only contained a couple of fingerprints of Janice! No agents were put on the stand to explain the mysterious lacking of both sets of fingerprints in comparison to the testimony given. Any reasonable person would ask how something like this could possibly happen in light of several people having their hand all over that file.
61

I. GOVERNMENT WITNESSES
The brother of our vice president, Carlos Perez was granted immunity and testified that he cashed no checks, even though government witnesses testified that he did. The jeweler, where a ring was bought was sent home because he couldn't identifY the ring that was purchased. Another witness, Debra Farsalas was charged by the government in an unrelated indictment and testified that she saw us eating in an expensive restaurant several times near our office, but was never asked what she was doing there on those days.
Restaurant bills were presented, but no effort was made to explain that the meals were eaten sometimes at two or three o'clock in the morning, because of the nature of the security business. Security officers frequently ate with us, and checks for petty cash were used to pay for minor obligations or holiday bonuses. No objections were raised at trial over the contents of safety deposit boxes being shown to the jury with cash inside, belonging to my Mother, with serial numbers on each of the bills dating to the 1960's, when I was in high school.
Netols told Judge Moran that there were threatening telephone calls placed by Jim Skrzypek to Barbara (BJ) Davis at the CHA. However, their investigation is continuing and they are unable to determine if it was Mr. Skrzypek at all. All they know is that a phone call was placed from the area that Mr. Skryzpek resides. Our attorney objected because he said it would cause a mistrial.
62
J. MYSTERIOUS CHECKS
A payroll check belonging to FBI undercover agent Theresa Mack aka Nancy Anderson, was deposited at the First National Bank of Chicago with a bank date stamp of August 7, 1994, and an issue date of September 5, 1994. In other words, the check was cashed almost one month before it was issued! Exhibit 56. Agent Mack testified that this must be a mistake.
In interviews with several banking officials at Bank One, the successor to First National Bank of Chicago, all stated separately and independently that, "a mistake like that just doesn't happen". It obviously does not, but the circumstances surrounding the mystery check is still that; a mystery.
K JUROR MISCONDUCT
Attorney Samuels told Judge Moran in my presence, that Jurors were speaking to witnesses in the bathroom down the hall. Judge Moran told him that there is nothing he can do. Samuels made no effort to question any jurors, even after I told him that I also overheard two of the jurors talking to each other about the case after being admonished not to do so by Judge Moran. In that incident, I was walking out of the elevator in back of two female jurors that were exiting the elevator next to mine. One juror was saying to the other, ""we're living from paycheck to paycheck, while they're driving expensive cars".

                                                                                                                                      63

L. FORENSIC ACCOUNTANT SAMUAL REMER
Our Attorney, Elliot Samuels, hired Sam Remer as a forensic accountant to assist in the defense of the numerous tax and overbilling charges contained in the indictment. The fees for the services provided were paid directly to Attorney Samuels, in order to maintain the attorney client privilege.
The initial meeting was made in the offices of Remer and Associates located in Highland Park. Elliot Samuels, Sam Remer and ourselves were in attendance at this time. Discussions focused on the taxes of the companies and the over billing charges. Remer requested records and other documents to review, which were provided at later meetings.
During the first meeting, Remer indicated that he had done similar work for one of our competitors, Digby Security, when they were having billing problems. At subsequent meetings he said that he and Samuels were close friends for years and were also golfing partners.
Throughout the following months, we made several trips to Highland Park, where we provided numerous documents to Remer. Remer went to the Chicago Offices of the F.B.I. and U.S. Attorney where he analyzed numerous billing statements that were in their posseSSIOn. Remer took copies of numerous documents back to his offices from those meetings.
After months of analyzing billing statements and other supporting documents, Remer said that he could find no evidence of over billing in the months that he did his analysis. In fact. he said that we had under billed and that the Chicago Housing Authority would wind up owing us money.
64

During the months Remer was retained, we were instructed to send forms that Remer prepared to the I.R.S., and to make sure they were sent certified mail, which we did. Remer also had members of his staff working on our taxes and various other documents. Remer made statements to us that they had a close relationship with the I.R.S. and were able to receive concessions and cooperation not ordinarily provided to other accounting firms. He gave the impression that he was able to work through many of the problems we were faced with.
After a superseding indictment was returned against us, we learned that the I.R.S. had interviewed Remer. Additional counts were returned against us for taxes that Remer was to have prepared. Days after the indictment, Remer messengered the taxes to us for filing that he kept in his possession for several months, which resulted in the superseding indictment. Remer was not only paid for these services, but billed us for additional sums related to these expenses.
Elliot Samuels expressed his concern that a problem may arise with Remer, and that he would have to consider what effect it would have on the case. I told Samuels that he should take steps to see if he has a connict since he was the one who hired Remer, his friend, and that his actions were the direct cause of additional criminal charges.
When the trial began we again discussed the position of Remer in this case, especially since he was our forensic accountant, and was able to prove we had not over billed. Samuels said that when the time came for Remer to appear, he would handle it. At the start of the triaL Remer was listed as a witness, but during the trial the prosecution decided not to call him.
65
At this point we conferred with Samuels about presenting him in our defense.
At this point Samuels handed us a stipulation the prosecutors had provided for us, stating that they did not want Remer called. When Samuels presented us with this stipulation we immediately refused, due to fact he had pertinent information about over billing. Samuels said that we did not have to decide on this stipulation at the moment and that he would review it before handing it back to the prosecution. That was the last time he brought it to our attention. Remer also prepared taxes for Monarch Security and the Skrzypeks' as part of his retention.
Remer prepared a report showing that there was absolutely no over billing, and in fact the CHA owed money to Federal Security. Exhibit 57. This report is never
given to us by Attorney Samuels and is discovered after the trial in Samuels notes.
M. NO POSSIBLE MISTAKES
When the government attempted to show over billing, Agent DeWick went into great detail of how there isn't a single mistake because they had several agents working full time to prove their casco Halfway through the testimony, it is revealed that DeWick had made mistakes and said this on the record when there is confusion between the name Tanya Hill and Tonya Hall. DeWick tried to minimize the effect by telling the Court that they will give us a credit of $500.00. There is no in depth questioning concerning this statement or any attempt to get at the truth by our attorneys regarding additional mistakes.
The government had a former guard named Willie Blockson testifY that he never had a partner. His personal time sheet was flashed on the screen and he went into great detail about how important it was to be truthful on this sheet, and for each day that he testified working alone, right next to his signature was the name of his partner.
66

N. FLEE AND PLEA
While all of this is happening, Attorney Samuels demands more money from us at trial, telling us that the trial is "in his hands". He demands the jewelry that Janice is wearing. She literally takes the jewelry off her body, in Court and in the hall, and hands it over to Samuels. Attorney Tommy Brewer, not satisfied with the prior financial arrangements, remarks now, that he needs more money! This, after we gave him Samuels over
$1 OO,OOO!
Samuels demeaned Janice in front of Netols and Heinze when he slapped her buttock as he concluded a conversation with them at which Janice was present. He later apologized for his behavior but the damage was done which sent a message of what he thought of defending our case.
At closing, Samuels told the jury that a cellular telephone was given to Mr. Kozak, when in fact nothing like that was ever done. This being done over vociferous objections, but this only added to the already no defense case that was completed.
After the jury returned a guilty verdict on all counts, Samuels agreed to a preliminary order of forfeiture that we did not agree to by saying that we would go to jail immediately if we didn't agree. After the verdict, we moved from our home in Chicago to live with my Mother. We gave away the majority of our possessions and remained there.
67
O. PRIVATE DETECTIVE PAUL CIOLINO
I was referred to Private Detective Paul Ciolino who has been representing us pro bono for approximately two years. He has most recently been responsible for the exoneration of numerous death row inmates in Illinois later found innocent for various
reasons, and is affiliated with Northwestern Law School Center for Wrongful Convictions. Mr. Ciolino began coordinating and researching our case and concluded that the evidence presented by the government was defensible with the proper legal team. This obviously was something we didn't have.
Mr. Ciolino began submitting Freedom of Information Requests to various agencies and attempting to gather evidence that would show what had occurred in our case. He too, was at a disadvantage since working Pro Bono and not having the resources to conduct a proper investigation, something that should have been done from the very beginning. Exhibit 58.
P. ABANDONMENT BY DEFENSE ATTORNEY ERIC FERLEGER
Mr. Ciolino called me and asked me if I was aware that one of my attorneys, Eric Ferleger, had been arrested. Ciolino told me that Ferleger had been arrested for battery by the Chicago Police Department while he was supposed to be attending our trial, and was the recipient of a formal complaint from the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission surrounding these incidents. Exhibit 59. I obtained police reports, court documents and mug shots of Ferleger along with an audiotape made by the Glenview Police Department, while Ferleger was supposed to be at our tria!, but instead, was vacationing at the Port of St. Thomas. Exhibit 60.
68
Ferleger was under the influence of drugs and was obviously impaired, as we would come to find out. This was the reason Ferleger disappeared 22 out of28 days of trial. He gave no opening or closing statement, nor asked one question or called any witnesses. He never returned, not even for the verdict. He totally abandoned us and sent a powerful message to the jury because of his absence. All the while Samuels tells us he is doing research, and paid Ferleger with money that was given to him, for basically, not showing up!
On February 16, 2002, Ferleger had gone to the home of Richard Grove, in Glenview, and threatened both Grove and his son Jordan. He was charged by the Glenview Police Department in that incident and his conversation with the detective can be heard on tape in the above exhibit.
On February 21, 2002, F erleger was charged with Battery by the Chicago Police Department after slamming Mr. Grove into the courtroom doors located on the 14th floor of the Daley Center in Chicago. The attack was so severe that Grove had to be rushed to Northwestern Hospital in the Chicago Police Squad Car, because Grove had just underwent open heart surgery and an ambulance would have taken too long. Grove underwent several transfusions and was on the heart transplant list.
On May 30, 2002, Ferleger filed a motion before Judge Moran in order to seek the release of a property to him. Exhibit 61. In that motion, Ferleger disclosed conversations among our attorneys that were privileged. Ferleger appeared before Judge Moran in the presence of our attorneys, Mr. Dennis Berkson and Mr. Marc Martin along with the Court Clerk Willie Haynes. Ferleger became agitated and made statements that he could not understand why we were not in jail, since Betty Loren Maltese had already went. He also said that he would go to the Chicago Tribune if we were not sentenced. 69
.
Both Mr. Berkson and Martin were absolutely astonished at Ferleger's behavior. Mr. Martin told me that he never saw Ferleger before in his life and could not believe what happened. With that, I instituted a formal complaint to the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission under complaint # 03-CI-3782. Exhibit 62. Ferleger brought suit against my wife and me under Case # 03 I 9747. Exhibit 63.
During that time, I was able to determine that Ferleger was also arrested by the Vernon Hills Police Department for possession of drugs. Exhibit 64. After Ferleger's suppression hearing in Lake County, the late Judge Thomas Smoker made a formal complaint to the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission.
On November 18, 2004, the Illinois Supreme Court made a final determination and suspended Ferleger from the practice of law. Exhibit 65. As part of the suspension, Ferleger must see psychiatrists for his mental and substance abuse problems, along with random drug testing and reporting requirements. Exhibit 66.
Recent efforts to depose Ferleger surrounding our case were unsuccessful after he showed up fifteen minutes late at the Law Offices of Christopher Langone, our attorney. Ferleger arrived and went into the conference room and began eating a sandwich. After he was finished, he objected to being video taped, even though he was given notice of a video taped deposition.
70
VI. JANICE SKRZYPEK'S VERBATUM FAX REPORTS TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, WASHINGTON D.C. DURING THE FIRST 12 DAYS OF TRIAL, WHILE JAMES IS IN CUSTODY.

The FBI raided Federal Security in 1994. They took all records from both offices. On January 28,2002, we finally went to Court after the U.S. Attorney's Office has been putting this case off since 1997. The last two continuances were because of the September 11 attack, and the last was because the wife of one of the assistant U.S. Attorney's had to have gall bladder surgery in two months. We appeared on January 28, 2002 before Judge Moran, where we had started to pick a jury. The following morning, January 29, 2002, while James was entering the building carrying a 40-pound suitcase, he threw his back out. We went into court where our Attorney, Mr. Samuels asked the Judge if James could be excused to go to the emergency room. James would have said anything to be able to go to the hospital. While James leaves for the hospital the rest of the jury is selected. Janice wanted to start the trial but the Assistant U.S. Attorney Netols refused to do so.

After Court, Janice went to the Northwestern Hospital Emergency Room to see her husband. By the time she arrived. he was in so much pain the Neurosurgeon came down and ordered an injection of Dilaudid to kill the pain. After several hours of waiting, James was finally admitted to a room on the 16th floor, which was a floor for pain management.
During his stay there, from January 29th through February 1,2002, he was heavily medicated with both Dilaudid and Norco, along with Flexiril to reduce the swelling.
71
On January 30, 2002, Dr. Daniel Dunham had a conference call with Judge Moran, U.S. Attorney Brian Netols and Defense Attorney Elliot Samuels. During the conference, Dr. Dunham informs the Judge that James is in severe physical pain.
James comes home on February 1,2002 on Friday night where a hospital bed has been delivered to prevent him from attempting stairs to his bedroom. Exhibit 67. His prescription is filled that night and continues to take medication. Exhibit 68. Janice orders pizza for dinner and he eats one piece. His appetite has decreased and he refuses to eat much. His sugars climb and his blood pressure is a little high. Friday night he is in constant pain and he takes and extra Dilaudid.
On February 3, 2002 a nurse was sent to the residence where she took a report and scheduled an appointment with the therapist. The nurse also made out a list of all his medications. Exhibit 69. On February 5, 2002 a therapist came to the house and examined James. During her visit, Jim complains of a severe leg pain and she pages the nurse on call for home visits. The nurse suggests it might be a blood clot and calls Doctor Dunham's office. An appointment is scheduled the next day. The therapist then sets up appointments for continued sessions. Exhibit 70.
The next appointment for James is with Dr. Dunham on February 6, 2002. He reports to the doctor and is examined. He is still diagnosed with continuing pain, but no blood clot. Dr. Dunham diagnoses the pain in his left leg from pressure put on his back from he herniated and collapsed disc. His prescription has been renewed, along with a referral to see a Neurosurgeon. Exhibit 71. Later that day, Dr. Dunham has a conference call with Judge Moran, U.S. Attorney Netols and Defense Attorney Samuels. Dr. Dunham explains Jim's medical condition and goes into detail of the intense pain Jim is in.On
72
February 7th, Janice makes contact with the Northwestern Neurosurgery Department to set up an appointment.
On February 8th, Janice receives a call from Neurosurgery scheduling for an appointment March 6th. Janice explains that her husband is on highly addicting medication and if it were possible to get in sooner. She said she would call back. Samuels calls Janice about the doctors appointment and Janice explains what the nurse said. Samuels tells the Judge about the March 6th date. The Judge didn't want to hold the jury that long, so he told the US Attorney to find a doctor.
That night, Mr. Samuels contacts Janice and explains that the Judge has ordered a second opinion by another doctor, and that James was to report in on Monday February 11, 2002 at 10:00 A.M. by Court Order. Exhibit 72.
Janice escorts James to the doctor's office at 9:30 A.M. The name of the Doctor is Martin Lanoff. Dr. LanotTtalks to Jim for about fifteen minutes. He never takes his blood
pressure or weight and pertinent inforn1ation before the examination. While examining Jim the Doctor explains to Janice that he can see that Jim is in pain. He even points out a same bulge in his back. During his examination he also discovered a sever case of hemorrhoids and explained to both Jim and Jan about having them lanced.
At 2:30 P.M. according to Defense Attorney Samuels, a Court appearance occurred in which Dr. Lanofftold the Judge that Jim was faking his symptoms and that he was not in pam. The Judge was so infuriated that he ordered an arrest warrant immediately.
At 4:30 P.M. Attorney Samuels contacts Janice and explains about the warrant at which time she requests if she could bring him in, because of the fact he was still in pain.
73
He told her the FBI would be there in one to two hours to arrest him. Ten minutes later Agent DeWick called Janice and said to have Jim ready to go.
At 4:45 P.M. Laura Hooks from Dr. Liu's office at Northwestern Hospital calls Janice and explains that the doctor cannot see Jim until either Thursday or Friday. Jan explains what is about to happen and pleads with Laura ifhe could just look at the MRl and give an opinion to the Judge. She promises to do it first thing Tuesday morning and to call her back at II :00 A.M. on Tuesday.
At 6:00 P.M. five FBI Agents show up at Jim and Jan's house and arrest Jim. They made him take off his shoes and walk outside even after they were informed he is diabetic and had to be extremely careful of his feet. They also handcuffed him behind his back though he could barely stand. They had to actually carry him out. Janice gave all of Jim's prescription medications to take with them (list enclosed). Exhibit 73.
That night, Janice tries to contact James at the Metropolitan Correctional Center but she is told she has to wait until tomorrow.
Jan calls Attorney Steve Wiser and leaves a message on his office answering machine. She then notifies Attorney Herb Joe to explain the situation about Jim being arrested.
Attorney Vince Laveri contacts Janice later that evening and explains that Steve was leaving to catch a train so he called instead. I explained everything to Vince and he tried to pull the docket up on his computer but the information wasn't issued yet. He tried to see how a Judge could issue a Bench Warrant without probable cause.
Tuesday, February 12, is Jim's Birthday. Janice tries to contact Jim and is told he is in lock up and cannot receive calls.
74
Tuesday at about 10:00 A.M., Jan receives a conference call from both Steve and Vince. They inform her that an Assistant United States Attorney out ofNetois office ran into Attorney Jim Koch at a basketball game and informed him that Jim was arrested. The name of the U.S. Attorney starts with D or A like De Arco. He informed Jim Koch that the doctor Jim saw on Monday was named Marty Lanoff. He was a paid for hire doctor who was trying to get more work from the U.S. Attorney's Office so he buried Jim before the Judge's eyes. Even U. S. Attorney Netols was surprised at what Lanofftold the Judge. He claimed that Jim was never ever in any pain and that he faked the whole thing. That was why the Judge got upset and revoked Jim"s bond.
Attorney Vince Lavieri also had some bad dealings with Dr. Lanoff on malpractice suits. In fact, he had a case with him where he testified against Vince's Father, who also was a doctor. Lanoff makes between two hundred and three hundred fifty thousand dollars year to testify in Court. That explains why he only had two chairs in his very small office at 39 South LaSalle and no patients waiting. Steve recommended that Janice give Attorney Jim Koch a call and maybe he could explain everything and help her out. Janice calls Koch and leaves a message for him. In the meantime, she contacts both of her attorneys to explain what happened. At 11 :00 A.M., Janice leaves a message for Laura Hooks of Doctor Liu's Office.
Attorney Jim Koch contacts Janice and explains that he could help her cut a deal if she wanted him to with Netols. Janice said she has to think about it and talk to Jim first. He tells her to think about it very carefully. Jan says she will and hangs up.
Elliot Samuels contacts Janice back and she explains everything she heard about Lanoff. He wants her to let him talk to the attorney but she didn't want to tell him.
75
After they argued, Janice got mad and told Elliot that he doesn't know half about what's going on and that another attorney contacted her about cutting a deal. Elliot got upset and wanted to know who the attorney was. He said it could cause some problems. He then asked if the attorney was Jim Koch? When Janice asked why he said that name, Elliot stated that Netols had told him that Koch contacted him for Jim and Jan to see if a deal could be cut. Jan or Jim had never asked Jim Koch to do this. Someone was lying. Janice said she would get back to Elliot after she talks to the attorney who gave her the information about Lanoff.
Tuesday Jan received a phone call at around 5:00 P.M. from Laura Hooks stating that Dr. Liu saw the MRI and confirmed that Jim has cause to be in pain. Jan asked Laura if she could have one of her Attorneys contact her about this information. Laura agrees. Jan contacts Tommy Brewer, one of her attorneys and explains everything to him. He contacts Laura at the hospital and tells her what he needs for Court on Wednesday. She agrees to get Tommy a letter.
Tommy then contacts Janice and explains what he told the nurse to do. Jan asks to meet with him tonight and set up an appointment at Carson's Ribs on Harlem at 7:30 P.M.
At the meeting, Jan explains about the telephone call from Jim Koch. She asks Tommy what she should do. She explains that Jim Koch had approached Jim six months ago about our case, and told Jim he could help cut a deal with Netols because he knows him. Jim asked Koch was Netols offering home confinement? Koch said, pretty close! Jim said forget it, we are going to trial. That was the only conversation Jim had with Koch. Obviously, Koch has been talking to Netols about our case without permission. Tommy told Jan to go ahead and give him authorization to talk to Netols and see what happens.                                                                                                                       (76


Janice went home that night and left a message on Steve Wiser's answering machine and left a message to call her so she could get Koch's home phone number. Jan called Koch and left a message on his home phone. Several hours later, Koch called back and told Janice to type something up and fax it to him. Jan did this. Exhibit 74.
February 13,2002 while Jan was driving downtown with clothes for Jim to wear during trial, she contacted Elliot by phone to ask where to drop off his clothes. Elliot got upset with her because Netols had contacted him regarding Jim Koch, claiming that Jan called him up at 2:00 A.M. and gave him permission to plea bargain for her. Jan said she would talk to Elliot about it when she got there.
Jan arrived at Court at 10:00 A.M. with Jim's clothes. She set them down and then
went to go hang up her coat. There was a gentleman standing in the back of the Courtroom. Jan thought he was a witness and therefore didn't acknowledge him. When Jan left the Courtroom to get a drink of water, he spoke to her and said, "I am Jim Koch". Jan apologized for not recognizing him but she only met him once in 1992 for about an hour. He said he was there to assist her for a plea bargain if she wanted him to. She said she had to talk to .lim first. He told her she should worry about herself first. She apologized that he had to come down there because she needed to talk to Jim first before she could talk to him. He then introduced her to another prosecutor named Tom and they both proceeded to encourage her to take a plea bargain deal before the trial starts, because once it starts, the deal gets worse.
Jan thanked them very much for appearing here but she still needed to talk to her husband. At that moment, Elliot arrived to Court. He acknowledged both .Ian and Jim Koch. Jan followed Elliot into the Courtroom to ask how to get the clothes up to Jim for
77
trial. Elliot didn't know but Willie the Judge's Clerk told Jan to go to the 24th floor and they will see he gets them.
As Jan left the Courtroom, Elliot, Jim Koch and Koch's friend Tom were talking.
She told Elliot she would be right back and was going up to the 24th floor.
After she dropped off the clothes, Jan went back to the 12th floor and ran into Jim Koch. Koch wanted to talk to Jan alone for a few minutes, so Netols offered Koch the witness room. Koch explains that he had a conversation with Elliot and my case doesn't look good. In fact, Koch said Elliot felt he was going to lose this case. Koch said now would be the perfect time before the trial started to make a deal Jan explained again that she needed to talk to Jim first. Koch said if she needed him to call Jim because his office
was across the street.
Jan went back to the Courtroom to await her Husband who she hadn't seen since Monday night. When he appeared, Jan broke down and cried because he looked so sickly. They wouldn't let Jan touch or kiss him hello. In fact, they separated Jan and Jim by putting the attorneys between them so that they couldn't talk or communicated with each other. Elliot waned Jim not to act sickly in front of the jury because Netols told him if Jim did, he would see to it that Jim stays in Jail until the trial was over.
When Jan was able to talk to Jim because the attorneys had a side bar, Jim told her that they took him to Bethany HospitaL because he was in pain. Agent De Wick took the doctor aside and stated if the doctor would just rubber-stamp the file, he would owe the doctor a big favor. So the doctor agreed. Jim also told Jan that they didn't give him any medications for his high blood pressure, Diabetes, High Cholesterol or Irritable Bowel Syndrome. The only medication they would allow him to have was Diabeta, even though he
78
had been on Dilaudid and Norco for two weeks. He was sitting to one side because he was in so much pain but he tried not to show it. He also told Jan that his blood sugar was 269, which is extremely high (normal is 90-120). Jim sat through opening statements in tremendous pain. After the jury was dismissed for lunch, Jan contacted Laura Hooks from Northwestern Hospital about faxing the letter to Judge Moran stating that Dr. Liu believed Jim was in pain and that he would see him Monday at 1 :00 P.M. When Court resumed at
1 :30 P.M. and before the opening statements were made, the Judge directed the jury that this trial would take place next Tuesday because the main witness for the prosecution was out of town and would not be back until Tuesday. This witness was never even on the witness list, (they could wait five days before starting a trial because of a prosecution witness, but not because Jim was ill).
After the jury was dismissed, Elliot approached the Judge to ask for Jim's release on the basis of both the letter from Dr. Liu and because he needed his medication and he was not given them in the last two days. He indicated to the Judge that since we were codefendants, we needed to be able to communicate. The Judge refused to release Jim, but signed a Court Order for Janice to see Jim anytime to discuss the case. He also signed a Court Order to allow Jim to see Dr. Liu on Monday. He was going to sign another Order to allow Jim his medications. Jan wanted to talk to the Judge, but they wouldn't let her. Netols appeared before the Judge and said to him "your Honor, see, he sat throughout the whole trial and didn't make a move". Attorney Brewer jumped up and stated to the Judge that the prosecutor threatened Jim with imprisonment if he showed any sign of pain.
The .I udge wouldn't hear it because of what Dr. Lanoff said. As they were taking Jim away, Jan asked her attorney if she could talk to Jim. The Judge said it was fine. When
79
Jan tried to kiss him goodbye, there were tears in his eyes. The U.S. Marshal jumped up and told Jan not to touch Jim. They then took him away and Jan broke down again.
When Jim left the Courthouse. she went over to the MCC Building to visit Jim.
When she arrived she informed the Guard that she had a Court Order that allowed unlimited
visits because of them being co-defendants. The guard on duty contacted someone on the telephone. Lt. Turner came down from the Z Unit Ward to explain to me all the rules and regulations. Lt. Turner said that Jim was still in route and that even though Jan had a Court Order, she would still need approval from the Warden, and Legal will still have to review everything. I should be able to see him on Thursday. I should call back at II :00 A.M. and see what happens.
That night Jan contacts Attorney Herb Joe, the forensic expert and details what happened. He couldn't believe it. She also contacts Dr. Motto, Jim's endocrinologist to explain about Jim being denied his medication for his Diabetes. She asked the Doctor what effect this would have on Jim. Dr. Motto told Jan to make sure he drinks plenty of fluids and to just watch his sugar and watch what he eats. He said to keep in touch in case of a serious situation.
Jan also makes contact with Dr. Bonomi from St. Lukes Hospital and explained everything to him about Jim's medical condition. She asked Dr. Bonomi ifhe could help her out by finding a neurosurgeon to see Jim by Thursday or Friday so Jim would not have to stay over the weekend at the MCC. Dr. Bonomi told Jan to have her attorney call him first thing in the morning and he would see what he could do.
80
The morning of Thursday February 14, 2002, Jan tried to contact Laura Hooks, Dr. Liu's nurse to see if Dr. Liu can see Jim earlier that Monday, but Laura didn't think it was possible. She would call be back if anything changed.
Jan contacted the MCC next to see if she could see Jim, but was told by Lt. Turner that they were still working on the paper work, but that he had seen Jim last night and explained how I was trying to see him and that he would be receiving phone privileges today. He also explained that he personally brought the paper work to legal so that I could see him.
Jan contacted both Elliot and Tommy next about Dr. Bonomi so that one of them could make contact with him. They were both going to try and reach him.
Jan waited all day by the phone hoping to hear from either her attorneys or Jim. Both attorneys called her back to say they tried to reach out for Dr. Bonomi but he hadn't called back yet.
Jan pages Dr. Bonomi again at about 4:00 P.M. At about 6:00 P.M, Dr. Bonomi calls back and apologized for not retuning the attorneys' calls, but to have them call his office in the morning. Jan made contact again with Tommy and requested that he contact Dr. Bonomi tomorrow.
On Friday, February 15,2002, Jan called the MCC to see if she could see Jim that day. Jan was told that she would have a form sent to her to be filled out and returned, in order to be approved at the MCC. Jan explained that she had a Court Order that allowed her to see Jim. The guard told her it was just a standard order and she would have to wait. She asked ifshe could speak to It. Turner and was told he was off today.
81
She contacted Elliot immediately to explain the problem. He said he was in the middle of preparing the Order for Jim's doctor appointment on Monday and that he would bring it up before the judge when he presented the Order. Jan mentioned about Dr. Bonomi but Elliot said it was too late to be able to get him approved for another appointment and to just stay with what we have.
Jan contacted Tommy Brewer to ask him to see Jim in the MCC since attorneys can go there anytime. Tommy said he would go by a 5:00 P.M. because then visiting hours start again. Tommy said he would call after he sees him. I asked Tommy to tell Jim to call me collect so that I can talk to him.
Later that night, Tommy called to tell me that when he arrived at the MCC, he forgot his Attorney Bar Card and that after making him wait for 45 minutes, they would not allow him to see Jim. Janice asked ifhe could find his card and see him on Saturday. Tommy said he would. Jan waited by the phone for Jimmy to call.
On Saturday, February 16,2002, Jan calls the MCC again, only this time she makes contact with a very helpful guard who finally explains that since he is in lock-up, it takes a week to get phone privileges. I explain that I was supposed to be able to communicate by Court Order since last week. She explains that doesn't mean anything in the MCC. I then ask ifhe has been taking his medications. She explains that there is a doctor that sees him every morning and not to worry.
At around 3:00 P.M. my attorney Elliot calls and tells Jan that the MCC refused to take Jim to the doctor on Monday. They will only take Jim to Bethany Hospital because they have a government contract with them. Jan begs Elliot to please do something since she has had no contact with Jim since last Wednesday and they go back to trial Tuesday.
82
Elliot try's to calm Jan down by telling her he is going to go before the Judge for another Court Order on Monday so Jim can still go to the doctor on Monday. When Jan hangs up, she calls Tommy to tell him what happened and to ask ifhe could see Jim on Sunday. Tommy said he will and will call her back. Jan also calls Attorney Herb Joe and lets him know what is happening and he can't believe it.
Sunday, February 18,2002, Jan waits by the phone for Tommy or Jim to call. No one does.
Monday, February 19,2002, Jan calls Elliot first thing in the morning and finds out that the Judge is not in because of the Holiday. Jan asked Elliot what she should do. He tells her to reschedule the appointment for later in the week. Jan explains it was almost impossible to get this appointment. He tells her she just has to work a miracle.
Jan calls Laura Hooks and leaves a message on her machine apologizing to her about canceling the appointment and asks her help again after explaining what happened.
Jan leaves a message on Attorney Sherwin Zaban's answering machine about what happened to Jim. Jan can't sleep because of waiting to see Jim. She calls Attorney Herb Joe and explains what has been happening.
Tuesday, February 20, 2002, Jan arrives in Court to await Elliot. Jim walks into Court like he is half dead. He tries to keep up his spirits but he is getting depressed. Jan asks if he has seen a doctor? He claims he has asked to see one but he had been denied because he is in Lock-Up. The only medication he has received was his Diabeta, not his high blood pressure medication. They denied him his cholesterol and Irritable Bowel medication along with his Asthma Medication. In the meantime, the government puts on the stand what they claim is one of the most important prosecution witnesses. Unfortunately, my husband is not able to concentrate, because of his illness.
83

He is in pain and is trying to pay attention. During lunch, we are unable to communicate because they take him back into custody. We have had no real communication throughout this trial because there is a u.s. Marshal sitting in back of Jim. After the jury is dismissed, Elliot again asks for release of Jim so he can see a doctor. The Judge won't listen.
That night, Sherwin Zaban calls Janice to ask what happened. After Janice explains, he tells her to call Lou Kasper, (former Chicago Republican Chairman and personal friend, now deceased) right away and make a report about Lanoff. Jan calls Lou and he tells her to call Charlotte Tybor, (a.k.a.Charlie, employed by the lllinois Department of Professional Regulation) in a couple of hours.
Jan calls Charlie and makes an appointment for tomorrow at 6:00 P.M. Jan calls the FBI Inspector General's Office in Washington D.C. and talks to a case agent. She explains what's happening and the agent gives her the Chicago office number to call tomorrow.
On Wednesday, February 2 I, 2002, Jan appears in Court and waits for Elliot. She tells him she got a doctor's appointment for Jim on Thursday at 9:30 A.M. but he need to be taken there. Elliot goes before the Judge and asked for Jim to be taken there. The Judge
will take it under consideration. Meantime, the government puts on their witness who was a co-defendant in this case. The co-defendant pled guilty and received a reduced sentence in order to testify. Netols spends the first part of the day practically leading the witness. When the witness didn't answer exactly right, Netols would get angry. After lunch, the Judge finally gives Jim permission to see the doctor on Thursday. Netols wants to get Jim to sign a
84
waiver from missing Court but the Judge said it's in the record. Jim would have said anything to be able to see the doctor because of the pain he was in and being denied medication.
After Jim is led away and there is no one left in the Courtroom, the FBI tells Jan and her attorney they will not be taking Jim to the doctor, and that he will have to find his own way there. Since I can't communicate with him, he doesn't know this.
Jan went to meet Charlie and Lou at 6: 15 P.M. to discuss Lanoff. A formal complaint is being drawn up. When Jan gets back, she starts to work on transcripts. She gets to bed about 3:00 A.M., and has to be up by 6:00 A.M. to pick up Jim from the MCC and take him to the doctor at Northwestern Hospital. She goes with Jim to the doctor but has to leave before his appointment in order to be in Court.
The trial resumes with the co-defendant on the stand. Netols continues to lead the witness. Jim arrives at 12:00 P.M. where the doctor writes a note that he has examined Mr. Skrzypek but needs to compare both this MRI taken two weeks ago and the one taken one year ago, before he gives his diagnosis. At the end of the day, Elliot approaches the Judge and requests his release again, based on the doctors statement. The Judge refuses on that basis but all of a sudden decided that he might take under consideration his release based on the fact that the MCC is overcrowded and that we are taking up the time of the U.S. Marshal.
I am awaiting the outcome of tomorrow to proceed further. Besides going to the U.S. Attorney's Office Investigation Unit and the FBI investigation unit, Channel 5 and Channe12 are on standby by several friends I know. If I cannot find relief by the government, then I am compelled to go to the media. I give it till February 22, 2002.
85

I have kept and obtained documentation of this account, including pictures and 302 reports, and from Laura Hooks that Dr. Liu's secretary is writing the report and sending it out Friday, February 22,2002 to Judge Moran's office.
Friday, February 22,2002, Jan reports to Court to await her Husband's outcome. In the meantime, she notifies both Elliot and Tommy that Dr. Liu will be sending a letter the Judge though she doesn't know what it will say. The Judge releases Jim because of overcrowding and the Marshal's time. We continue with the trial. The Judge calls for a lunch break and Elliot requests that Jim be release so that we can at least start to the discuss the case, since we haven't had contact with him during the trial. The Judge agrees, but one U.S. Marshal, who has been ajerk since the beginning said Jim has to be in custody until the end of the day. While they take him away, Jan calls the U.S. Marshal and talks to someone in charge to have her husband released. Jim goes back to the MCC and is immediately released. He meets with Jan and their attorneys and finally discusses the case, which has been going on for two weeks. They return to the Courtroom to proceed with the case. After the Judge dismisses the jury, Jan and Jim decide to talk in the Court Cloak Room. As Jan approaches the cloak room, Agent DeWick grabs her arm and says, " Jan, where are the U.S. Marshals', (not knowing Jim had already been released)! IRS Agent Franco walked up to DeWick and stated that Jim had already been released, in which case ha apologized to "Mr. Skrzypek" to let him pass.
In the meantime, Dr. Liu sends the letter of Jim's condition to Judge Moran and my Attorney Elliot Samuels, and is entered in the Court records. Exhibit 75. Also disclosed. is the fact that my accountant. Henry Pawlik, who was supposed to be indicted for embezzlement of my company's payroll taxes, was instead only convicted of underreporting
86
his income tax, in order to allow him to testify against us. Unfortunately, while they allowed him to run free waiting for our trial, he commits a murder in Nevada, and an attempt at a second. I also find out today that three other witnesses are testifying against us, in order to receive lesser term sentences. One who was indicted as a co-defendant was given immunity, and the other one has absolutely nothing to do with our case. Also, one of the IRS agents involved in this case is presently under investigation for discussing the case before trial with unknown individuals who had nothing to do with this case. Dr. Lanoff is also being investigated by the Department of Professional Regulation for perjury and falsifying his testimony. Exhibit 76.
I am notifying the press about this situation but still allowing you time to investigate. As per the duty officer I talked to on Wednesday, I am sending it directly to you too, so that you may direct it to the Chicago Office.
While the trial is going on a letter was received from the Office of Inspector General in Washington D.C. Exhibit 77.
87
VII. PROSECUTORIAL CRIMINAL CONDUCT AND NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE.
REPORT OF FINDINGS DURING LIMITED ACCESS TO EVIDENCE ROOM LOCATED AT THE DIRKSEN FEDERAL BUILDING
TO: DENNIS A. BERKSON ATTORNEY AT LAW
180 N. LA SALLE STREET SUITE 1925
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60601
MARC W. MARTIN ATTORNEY AT LAW
53 W. JACKSON BOULEVARD SUITE 1420
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60604
PAUL J. CIOLINO
820 W. JACKSON BOULEVARD SUITE 3 E
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60607
88

FOREWORD

On June 27, 2004 and July 30, 2004, I had been allowed access to several boxes of evidence located in the U.S. Attorneys Office, Dirksen Federal Building, 219 S. Dearborn, Chicago, Illinois, for the purpose of examining and copying records retained by the Government.
At each time, I was accompanied by Jose Franco, Special Agent for the Internal Revenue Service, who stayed with me throughout the time I was in the room. I also was given handwritten logs to the boxes of evidence by Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Netols during my first visit to the room on June 27, 2004.
The 200 plus boxes of evidence were not in order, making it difficult and time consuming to locate. In addition, items that had to be photocopied had to be copied on government copiers that were not in working order, constantly jamming and in need of repair.
The effort on both occasions was both time consuming and frustrating. During my second visit, box # 147 was missing. When I inquired as to its whereabouts I was told by Agent Franco that" I was not entitled to it, and it was removed".
I was, however, able to secure valuable information, including actual handwritten notes authorizing "covert" searches that are accompanied herein. This, along with other evidence that follows, will show an undeniable pattern of prosecutorial misconduct in this case.
There are many other copies of documents that I have made, but the ones that follow are by far some of the most disturbing and must be used in a motion to set aside this verdict.
As of this date, I am awaiting permission to re-enter the evidence room to continue examining the remainder of the boxes.
Janice M. Skrzypek August 27, 200-1
89
TABLE OF CONTENTS AND EVIDENCE DESCRIPTION
1. June 14, 1995 Memorandum from Special Agent James R. Appelbaum (Squad 7c) to the Special Agent in Charge, Chicago Office of the FBI, Subject: Jenner and Block Report on the Chicago Housing Authority.
Highlighted in paragraph two is "The second reportjocuses on vendor activities, and is broken into three areas. The first being purchasing and contracts, second the CHA's contract security firm and third the CHA police billing." At the bottom of the page, please note the highlighted circle 1-147A-CG-92714, which is the case number used by the FBI in our case.
This exculpatory report has and is still being withheld despite repeated Freedom of Information Requests to the Chicago Housing Authority, FBI, U.S. Attorneys Office, both Washington and Chicago and the Internal Revenue Service, Washington D.C.
2. Analysis of Federal Security bills submitted to the Chicago Housing Authority compared to Federal Security payroll records showing the following:
1/93 through 7/15/94 1/93 through 7/15/94
Alleged Overbilling CIIA Funds Withheld (I)
$640.537.30 $826.127.99
$186,540.69 Owed Federal Security.
3. Handwritten notes of Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Netols dated during the Month of October 1994 authorizing, "COVERT SEARCHES OF CARS!"
4. Handwritten notes of Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Netols dated during the Month of October 1994 indicating "what we are taking in search, 2 offices not house search warrant." A copy of the opening statement highlighted on page 4 and 27 is attached indicating the jury will see pictures of the house.
5. Handwritten trial notes of Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Netols indicating, '"need pictures of house, cars, etc."
6. Handwritten trial notes of Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Netols rigging testimony of Carlos Perez, "check with ISpecial Agentl Shoup !Iistl chart make sure consistent with what Carlos testifying about." Under that caption is noted, '"immunity letter signed by [U.s. Attorney James Burns) Burn. ..
(I) Duc to infractions i.c. officers without tan cards. watching TV .. reading a hook. Also does not include discrepancies i.e .. sign in sheet not signed properly)
7. January 3. 1995 Memorandum from Special Agent John Robert Shoup (SQ. 7 A) to the Special Agent in Charge, Chicago Office of the FBI, Subject: Summary of all consensual
90
telephonic and non-telephonic recordings made to date. Note handwriting in the comments column which state among other things, "Nagra Malfunction, Recorder Malfunction, FBI Lab Prepared Enhanced Tape." A Copy of a Court Order signed by Judge Moran dated 2/25/02 during trial, ordered access to these very logs. Netols told Judge Moran on the record that the FBI doesn't keep these records!
8. July 18, 1994 and August 4, 1994 Memorandums from Special Agent John Robert Shoup to the Special Agent in Charge, Chicago Office of the FBI, requesting an ELSUR or ELA sub file be opened and requesting a sub tile titled Sub EL 1 B be opened. ELSUR is an acronym for Electronic Surveillance. EtA is an acronym for Electronic Audio.
9. FBI-192/FD-192A Report dated September 27, 1994, example of which was requested and Court Ordered, (see #7), FBI, FD-523 AIRTEL dated 7/21/94 for surveillance/concealment film developing, FBI, FD-36 dated 8/24/94, Transmittal for audio tapes that have malfunctioned/request for enhancement.

None of the documents that were examined were ever seen by the Defense at all, and this is just the tip of the iceburg! The government had all of these documents in their possession at all times, but never gave them to the Defense, even after they were Ordered by this Court to do so on several occasions. Instead. Brian Netols gave denials in open court by stating that documents and tape recorders do not exist because the case is so old!

We have found summary sheets, Airtel documents, FBI Memorandums, Electronic Surveillance Memorandums, Audio tape enhancements sent to the FBI Laboratory in Quantico Virginia, recorder malfunctions, Electronic Sub tile Memorandums, to name just a few.

We have determined that extensive tiles exist that were not turned over to the Defense as required. No one can lose sight of the pattern of misconduct by the government in this case, and especially Brian Netols. The handwritten notes of"covert searches of cars," are a small reminder of what has occurred in this case.
91
The first solid indication of wrongdoing by Netols was in opening statements.
He told the jury that they would see pictures of our house and indoor swimming pool, and said the house was nothing short of opulent on the inside. But how did he get in? It turns out he was in there three times when he demanded that we be taken into custody on those three days of July 1997. This way, he had full and complete control over what he could do without any interference whatsoever. His repeated entries into our home in Chicago violated our 4^{th Amendment Rights under the Constitution of the United States. God only knows what this man has done during the illegal break-in of our home!}
Now, there is ample evidence to suggest that our efforts were thwarted to discover and authenticate critical audiotape evidence presented by the government that was needed in order to bring a case against our company and us. The entire scenario surrounds knowledge, and the audiotapes are the lynch pin that the government needed. Without contact or association with Rick Kozak, the Chicago Housing Authority official, there would be nothing to tie us into their case. Some form of evidence would be needed, and that form was audiotape evidence. This was their probable cause!
Repeated efforts to examine the recorders, the log books, the chain of custody, the records of where, when and how these tapes were made was met with staunch resistance and broken agreements, which led to the issuance of a Court Order, which was also circumvented and skirted. As we see now, there was a reason to do so, because if it was determined that the audiotapes were falsified, there would be no case albeit a trial.
Every time an agreement was made regarding the audiotapes, Netols would make sure it was broken. Our expert came to Chicago from Wisconsin to examine the audiotapes and Netols made sure his examination was obstructed, which sent him packing back to his
92
laboratory with copies of audiotapes that were presented to him as being originals. No testing was done to ever confirm that they were originals other than the word of Agent DeWick from the FBI, who wasn't even the original case agent. With $6000 gone in fees for their trip, more money had to be expended for another examination.
When Tony Pellicano called Netols in September of2001, Netols was more than happy to take those tapes to Los Angeles. He told the Court of the agreement with Pellicano and Pellicano confirmed this to me on the telephone. Little did I know what the real reason was and wouldn't know until Pellicano went to jail for possession of explosives, after his office was raided by the government and his equipment was seized.
In my first telephone call to Pellicano, he couldn't stop bragging about the FBI bringing audiotapes to his office for examination. He told me that he does more audiotape work for the FBI than Quantico Virginia! He told me there wouldn't be a problem having them (FBI) fly the tapes to his lab. The next time I talked to him he was irate that I decided to have the tapes re-tested by Cain in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin.
We now know that Pellicano was a master at creating audio and videotape evidence for the prosecution. The t1urry of newspaper articles are attached from around the country. He even created an audiotape of the voice of a Los Angeles Times reporter, who did an earlier story on Pellicano and his state of the art equipment when he was visiting his laboratory. The reporter said a few words on tape, Pellicano downloaded the words in his computer, and voila. a different conversation!
Pellicano undoubtedly was at the center of the manufacture of the audiotapes of my wife and me. Why else would Netols agree to take the tapes 2000 miles to Los Angeles and fight against taking them to Lake Geneva, Wisconsin, only 80 miles from Chicago?
93
Pellicano was absolutely right when he told me that he does all the work for the FBI, Because I know now that he did our tapes as well. Our original audiotapes in this case are likely in the hands of the United States Attorney in California when his offices were raided.
Pellicano faked tapes of several high profile cases in which defendants are currently incarcerated. He came up with a third voice on a 40 year old reel to reel tape, during a federal trial of a man charged with a church bombing in Alabama that killed four young girls, and that was after the FBI's own laboratory couldn't do it! He tried to do it in Florida during the Aisenberg kidnapping case, but he was finally exposed for what he was. In court testimony, it was revealed that he was a high school dropout and couldn't explain anything about any of the tests he conducted on the secretly recorded tapes of the Aisenbergs. In January 2005, the television show 48 Hours featured him exclusively as the one the government went to when they needed an audiotape expert!
Delay was the tactic and even a Court Order did not prevent Netols from continuing with this pattern of conduct. He made sure that the third tape of a lengthy meeting was not given to the Defense until two months before the triaL eight years after the meeting occurred! This was designed to have us scramble for authentication and cloud the memory of that day in September 1994.

Further attempts to authenticate the audiotapes were both a waste of time and money.
No one could tell if they were originals because there was never any recorders examined that made the tapes. The third tape was never examined at all and when it was it was after the trial started, and still, no original tape recorder was provided that made the tape! While we and our expert was at 200 W. Adams, DeWick said that a Nagra Recorder was being sent over from Elgin, Illinois, and that wasn't the one that made the tape. It was provided so that the tape could be played. There was absolutely no comparison, so the tactic worked once again.                                         (94)

Netols told the Court that the items on the Court Order were not saved
Because the case was too old. No chain of custody, no maintenance records, summary sheets or evidence of audiotape enhancement were available, which we know now he had all along! The documents show audiotapes being sent to the FBI Laboratory in Quantico, Virginia for enhancement, Nagra Tape Recorder malfunctions, surveillance photographs, Electronic Surveillance Memorandums, Sub Electronic Surveillance Files, Chain of Custody Documents, etc.
On November 9,2004, a motion was heard by Judge Moran, that requested a report that was prepared by the law firm of Jenner and Block for the Chicago Housing Authority, that had not been tendered to the Defense. The motion also disclosed the personal handwritten notes of Brian Netols, regarding authorization of "covert searches of cars," and requested any Brady Material that had not been turned over to the Defense. Exhibit 78. originally prepared a motion of my own, which was initially more detailed than the one heard on November 9. Exhibit 79.
Netols left the United States Attorney's Office, and if you think it was done voluntarily or for some health issue, you are sadly mistaken. Rumors have abounded and the real reasons are being kept secret, but suffice to say as was said to Janice on June 27, 2004 by IRS Agent Jose Franco that, "Netols had to leave"!
Why, is the question? Is it because of what occurred in our case? I certainly would like to think that it was, but there is a laundry list of other occurrences, such as an investigation into the unlawful flight to avoid prosecution of Attorney George Palivos.
95
Netols, as it turns out, is the Godfather to the son of Palivos, and was under investigation for disclosing confidential information to Palivos, that resulted in his disappearance and flight to Greece. Our defense attorney Tommy Brewer told Janice that after George Palivos told Netols he was going to Greece, Netols, "had a tear in his eye".
Netols is also closely aligned with Peter Palivos. Netols attended a fundraiser at his Lake Point Tower Condominium for my former Attorney Tommy Brewer, when he unsuccessfully ran for Sheriff of Cook County. Ironically, my wife and I were also in attendance.
It is well known that an Assistant US Attorney has an obligation to disclose a personal or business relationship with a subject or a target in a case, whether he is or is not involved in the case himself.
On January 25, 2005, Peter Palivos held a news conference with regard to our former defense counsel Elliot Samuels and his client, who testified against Palivos. Samuels convinced his client to plead guilty because he was told by the FBI that certain forensic test results implicated his client. Samuels has his client testify before the Grand Jury and read a statement prepared by the government.
Later on, Samuels has lunch with another familiar name, Attorney Tommy Brewer, who, as you recall, was selected two weeks before our trial to ask questions regarding the falsified audio tapes. Brewer, who is a friend of Palivos, shows Samuels the real results of the forensic tests that were obtained by Palivos during discovery. Samuels gets mad, tells Brewer he is going to withdraw his client's plea, writes a letter to his client and threatens the government. The government in turn tells Samuels that ifhe does this, his client will be prosecuted for perjury.
96
After Palivos goes to trial and is found guilty, the letter emerges and Samuels now says in an affidavit that the reason he wrote it in the first place was to insure his client's continued employment and to divert attention to his case with the government. This is like trying to explain to your wife that you really weren't kissing another woman, you were just trying to take something out of her eye! He goes on record as stating that he told former defense counsel Thomas Breen that the letter was bogus. He also said that the letter was in the possession of the defense before trial. Both of these statements were rebuffed by Mr. Breen. Exhibit 80.

It is believed that Samuels had to fall on the sword or he would be going down too.
This makes sense because he once told us that no one pays their payroll taxes on time, including him. I wonder what threats were made to Samuels in order to make him prepare such an affidavit.
Netols began his campaign of deceit immediately in the investigation of our companies and us. He tried a '"Trojan Horse" technique by sending in a disc to us via courier that contained a '"Monkey Virus" which completely destroyed the computer of our former employee, Matthew Aldaka. Aldaka testified to those events at trial. Netols did this when he discovered that we were still in possession of information on computers that the government failed to seize back in 1994.
Computer files of any kind were not guaranteed from tampering. A law clerk from Winston and Strawn discovered entries in our computers early on that were made after the government seized the computers.
97
Netols appeared at my divorce trial and pe~jured himself when he was asked ifhe was there via subpoena. He responded that he was, which made both the subpoena and his appearance occurring in record time, not less than twenty minutes from start to finish.
He managed to hold the information concerning our accountant Henry Pawlik, close to the vest, and released no details of his indictment to us until the statute of limitations expired on possible prosecution for his theft of money owed in taxes that were embezzled from us. He then indicted Pawlik for under reporting his income. While all of this was going on, Netols let Pawlik go to Las Vegas where he got a job at the Blue Chip Sports Betting Parlor. He was asked to kill Bruce Fisher, the boyfriend of his boss's mistress who was a topless dancer at the Crazy Horse Saloon. Pawlik enlisted the help of his friend, Jason Paris from Chicago to do the job. Paris went to Fischer's apartment where he lured him out by telling him that he just struck his car in the parking lot, and then shot and killed him. He was fortunately stopped from committing another murder, after the police intercepted their plans in telephone conversations.
Pawlik had done our taxes and accounting since the 1980's. There was no reason to distrust him. r was very close to his family and gave a used car to his daughter Katie as a reward for good academic perfOtmance in high school. Earlier, Pawlik requested that we visit Katie while she was admitted to a psychiatric facility on the west side of Chicago, because he was unable to come from Las Vegas. Katie had been confined there and was under care at that facility.
At trial, the government conveniently misplaced a $17, 000 check that would have catapulted Pawlik into another sentencing bracket. We find out that Netols withholds this check form the Court and makes it unavailable to us at trial. He returns Pawlik to the High
98
desert State Penitentiary in Law Vegas, before our trial is over and before we have an opportunity to consider calling him as a witness in our defense.
Netols also does everything he can to persuade us into entering into a plea agreement. He asks Attorney James Koch, a friend of his, to convince us to enter into a plea agreement and gives Koch details of the offer. Koch is an attorney recommended by Attorney Douglas Darch of Seyfarth Shaw in Chicago, who handled a matter for us before the National Labor Relations Board. Koch took brief statements from two former employees of ours and then recommended another attorney named Steve Wiser, from Levin, McPartland and Phillips for completing the case.
Koch initially called me at Resurrection Hospital in Chicago, where I was undergoing some tests as an outpatient. I stayed on the telephone with Koch for some time and he gave details of how N etols asked him to contact us to see if a plea agreement could be reached. I made light of it at the time by asking Koch ifhe would give me "driving school, or home confinement". Pretty close, is what Koch told me. I thanked him for his efforts but told him that he didn't know the case and that we didn't do anything wrong.
Netols also had Koch contact my wife when I was in confined to the Metropolitan Correctional Center while our trial was underway. Koch was pressuring her to jump ship, as it were, and to think of herself! Netols also arranged for another US Attorney to be present in order to facilitate a plea agreement. Our brilliant legal team, headed by Elliot Samuels doesn't think this is strange or unusual and can't figure out that maybe he should let the judge know about this. That's probably because he was admiring the jewelry around my wife's neck and wondered how much he could get for it!
99
The reason I am locked up in the first place is because Netols has me see the notorious Dr. Marty Lanoff, famed for the professional medical diagnosis he has given in mine and other medical cases. Lanoff is described as a hired gun and rightly so. This man's credentials to practice medicine are more than suspect having had numerous complaints with the Illinois Department of Professional Regulation as seen in earlier exhibits. Netols promises him a contract with the US Attorneys Office ifhe does him a favor. Jim Koch verifies this when he tells Attorney Steve Wiser that he bumped into an Assistant US Attorney at his son's sporting event. The AU SA is named D'Arco or something to that effect.
After some digging, we find numerous Lanoff complaints, including his wrongful death complaint and a deposition given about six weeks after our trial. After you see the documents, you can now figure out why Lanoff is testifying as a hired gun! He has lied in court testimony, lied to hospitals regarding membership, falsified records, lied about his academic background, lied about the schools that he allegedly graduated, and lied about the courses that he took. The man lies so much that he needs a scorecard to keep track of his testimony! His grade point average is in the bargain basement, and he can't get a grade higher than a C. even though he's shopped around for a variety of a la carte courses in a number of schools, as far away as the middle east! Would anyone want him to be his or her primary physician?
Possessing no undergraduate degree from any institution, Lanoff somehow is admitted to the Chicago Medical School, where, as it turns out, is under criminal investigation and academic probation. Lanoff, however, calls this home and is allowed to graduate with an undesirable academic record. Odds of admittance by anyone else, 100
struggling to enter a medical school are astronomical. For openers, you have to have the highest grade point average, along with weighted letters of recommendation and an evaluation of academic credentials. Lanoff can't even pass Microbiology and only gets a C in Human Anatomy, and that's in college, not medical school! How he passed the State Board Examination with his record is still a mystery.
Lanoff testified in February 2002 that I was faking my injuries. Remember, I am just released from Northwestern Hospital in Chicago after having been there for 4 days. You have to be injured for the doctors at Northwestern to put you in the hospital for 4 days. I'm given medications, orally and intravenously. They are some of the most powerful drugs that are available for pain. Aside from Morphine, drugs such as Dilaudid and Norco rank near the top.
I am discharged and taken to my residence for recuperation and then ordered to see Dr. Lanoff. Little do I know at the time that I am injury and pain free, according to Lanoff. Without benefit of X-Rays, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRl). or any other testing, Lanoff proclaims that 1 am faking my injuries! Forget about the Neurosurgeons, the specialists and pain management experts at Northwestern Hospital. Lanoff comes through for Netols and I am subjected to an unbelievable series of events, starting with my arrest, a bogus examination at Bethany Hospital, no prescribed pain medication or normal medications, and isolation for 12 days, all while the trial is underway. I say bogus examination at Bethany Hospital for a reason. John DeWick, the FBI Agent, talked to the doctor within ear range of me when I laid on a gurney, and asked him to take care of the exam. This doctor did not take even an X-Ray! All he did was run his finger up my foot and tell DeWick that this was a little trick he learned!
101
DeWick said in Court that I signed the hospital release indicating that I was not hurt or in pain. This, after he told me that if! didn't sign the sheet, my lawyer would have to come to the hospital at this hour. I signed, reluctantly, but what DeWick obviously did not see was my notation, "without counsel" which is strikingly similar to "under duress"!
I'm taken back to the MCC and I can't see my wife, can't make a telephone call, can't see a doctor, can't talk to my lawyer, can't have my medications including pain medications, and Netols is more than happy. I am unable to prepare for trial, confer with counsel, confer with my wife or communicate with anyone, whatsoever.
Finally, after more than a week, I am allowed to go to Northwestern Hospital to see Dr. John Liu, Assistant Professor of Neurology. I am not transported to the hospital despite assurances by Netols and a Court Order by Judge Moran that I will be. Netols tells my lawyers that I'm going to have to get there myself.
Dr. Liu strongly disagrees with the diagnosis of Dr. Lanoff and writes a letter to Judge Moran verifying my condition as consistent with the events that occurred leading up to my injury. Dr. Liu compares all of my past and present medical records, MRI's and other accident records to make his decision, something you would obviously expect from someone calling himself a doctor!
I am released and feel as though I got my life back, but can't undo the damage done to us at the trial and the tremendous advantage Netols and the government had because of these events. I was denied counsel, medical attention and pain medications. Forced to sit through a trial in pain, with threats that if I showed any pain, I would be kept in jail indefinitely.
102
IX. INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL
Now, after more than two years later. the discovery of hidden documents makes it abundantly clear what has happened in this case and shows, to what extent, the government is capable of doing to those innocent of crimes. If there is no evidence, that isn't a problem. They will make it up or hide it from the Defense in order to obtain a conviction and deny us a fair trial. It is difficult enough to defend yourself from the charges brought about by the government, but it becomes impossible when you are unable to hire competent defense attorneys, forensic experts, investigators or others that can assist you in defending yourself. What you do have are attorneys that are part of the prosecution and offer no formidable defense, whatsoever. We have all heard the saying that, "you get what you pay for"! This is more of an understatement in the case of our lawyers. Elliot Samuels repeatedly assured us that he is working on the case and is interviewing witnesses. In reality, he is doing nothing to advance our case. The examples are numerous, starting from his failure to interview anyone with knowledge of what had occurred and calling one witness. Samuels is inept and ineffective for the following reasons:

1. A mistrial was not raised during opening arguments by the prosecution when the lack of search warrants was revealed for the first time.

2. No proof of search warrants were obtained during years of discovery.
3. Nothing was done on the case~ i.e. No witnesses were called., No investigation whatsoever, was conducted, no research was done, etc. There is no attempt, whatsoever, to determine the status of the other co-defendants in this case. There is no attempt to interview them for any possible exculpatory evidence, even though one defendant, Carlton Short, is near death and unable to stand trial.
103
4. No logical objections were ever raised during trial.
5. Admissions of unlawful conduct were made during trial over our objections, which were totally untrue. Samuels told the jury that James gave an official of the CHA a cellular telephone when it had not occurred, in order to "admit something"!
6. Failing to object to the Motion in Limine.
7. Failing to inform us of the whereabouts of defense counsel Eric Ferleger, who left 22 out of 28 days of trial and never returned. It was later discover that he was arrested on the days he should have been at trial and was impaired by drugs. He also left the country and never returned to the courtroom.
8. Defense Counsel Tommy Brewer losing his Bar Association Membership Card and was refused entrance to the MCC because he cannot prove he is an attorney, while James is incarcerated, and while the trial is underway.
9. No sanctions were ever requested for the failure to obey numerous Court Orders that were issued.
10. Failing to raise a genuine conflict of interest concerning his friend, Forensic Accountant Samuel Remer, who Samuels hired and who was personally responsible for additional counts of the indictment, and failing to advise the Court of this conflict when he had a duty and obligation to do so.
I I. Failing to make the Court aware of secret plea bargaining negotiations from outside counsel James Koch.
12. Threatening that the case was in "his" hands unless more money was given during trial, and telling us that our freedom would be in jeopardy, causing Janice to literally give Samuels the jewelry on her body to satisfy his demands. Second co-counsel Brewer also demanded additional funds when both were together, even though he was brought on for the limited purpose of exposing the fake audiotapes of our conversations, and was paid in advance.
13. Failing to object on the record about jury misconduct i.e. jurors speaking to witnesses in the restrooms and jurors caught speaking to one another about the trial in the presence of defendant.
14. Failing to file any post trial motions whatsoever.
15. Failing to review a motion that was filed by Attorney Eric Ferleger, which highlighted confidential attorney client conversations.
104
16. Failing to inform the court of extensive complaint record of Dr. Martin Lanoff for Perjury, Falsification of Records, Wrongful Death, Misdiagnosis etc. even though the information was available to him on February 21, 2002, DURING THE TRIAL!
17. Failing to inform the Court about the absence and arrest of Attorney Eric Ferleger.

Two weeks before the trial, we had to hire Tommy Brewer as a back-up attorney for the sole purpose of concentrating on the bogus audiotape evidence, because Samuels doesn't want to be bothered with it, and he tells our expert, Herb Joe, precisely that in no uncertain terms!

As it turns out, Brewer becomes part of the problem and not the solution when he defects to Samuel's side and now concentrates his efforts on getting as much money as he can, before the Titanic sinks! No one knows where Eric Ferleger is during the trial. We know he is getting paid and every time we ask we get the same response, that he is doing research. It is abundantly clear that Samuels and Brewer knew all along that Ferleger was arrested and had gone on a cruise during our trial, and withheld that information from the Court and from us. Brewer was so inept that he couldn't even get into the Metropolitan Correctional Center to see me during those first 12 critical days of trial because he lost his Illinois State Bar License Card and couldn't prove he was a lawyer. Ferleger couldn't see me because he was out of the country! When Netols made his opening statement and we found out there were no search warrants for the search of our home, any logical defense attorney would have moved for a mistrial. Not Samuels, he slid it under the rug to help Netols win. I still wonder what the deal was between them, because there was no logical reason, whatsoever, to keep this a secret! The trial would have come to a screeching halt if the disclosure of the illegal entries had been disclosed!
105

Samuels never made an issue of the audiotapes and it cost me $6,000 because the expert had to come to Chicago. Samuels gave us his word that a Court Order wouldn't be necessary because he had the word of Brian Netols. As it turned out, it cost me another $6,000 for absolutely nothing, and we had to get a Court Order anyway, which in the end was skirted by Netols.
Samuels discouraged us from having the tapes examined from the very beginning and told Cain to give him a "verbal report," so that he wouldn't have to let the judge know. This is evident in his personal notes, and his future attempts to return the money I gave him to have the original tapes tested. He never asked for the audiotape of the final meeting in September 1994 and never made an issue of it when it was given to us in November 2001, two months before the start of our trial.
We wanted him to advise the Court of the photographs and Grand Jury statements made to my friends by IRS Agent Jose Franco and Samuels assured us that he would. Instead, I had to make a complaint during the trial, because he said I couldn't bring this up. When Ferleger brought a lawsuit against me in 2003, a countersuit was initiated and Samuels and Brewer were listed as additional defendants as relates to the circumstances surrounding their representation of us.
106
CLOSING
This conviction is woven and replete with so much corruption and criminal conduct by the prosecution that it cannot possibly be allowed to stand. From the illegal, "covert," searches, repeated break-ins of our home, withholding of Brady Material, perjury and manufactured evidence, among others, this case will eventually surface as a textbook example of what can occur when unbridled corruption becomes the standard of the prosecution.
It is hard to comprehend that something like this can go on in a Country such as ours, but once you understand the evil that pervades throughout these agencies, it becomes clear that the right combination of circumstances wi II lend itself to these injustices. It is tantamount to the conditions that exist during a tornado or other natural disaster where there is heat, rapid cooling, moisture in the air and lightning and then, a tornado!
It is likely the same during unlawful or wrongful convictions. There is a prosecutor who is surrounded by other members of his or her office that are unscrupulous and are willing to break the law to obtain a conviction. Add to that a few members of law enforcement who are willing to help the prosecution in any way in order to achieve that objective. It is done for the purpose of currying favor among peers or supervisors, or insuring a promotion, transfer to a better assignment or some sort of recognition. Innocence, by all means, never enters the equation. The ends justify the means.
We are not thieves. We never have been, and it makes no sense that we would start now. There have never been any accusations in the least of theft in our lives and we can pride ourselves that the documentation deliberately hidden from us will bear this out.
107
Thieves, as they say, take the money and run! We haven't.
We have tried to make a difference in starting a new business, one that we were none too familiar with. Placing trust in certain people has resulted in disaster. These experiences are all around each and everyone of us. We see it daily, from the boardroom to the highest levels of government. There are those that have had their own hidden agenda and that was obvious. They were the ones that had nothing to lose.
We tried to make a difference for the guards that worked in housing by providing some of the following:
• Bulletproof vests.
Personal pagers.
        Payroll advances.
• Extended in-service training.
Weapon training.
    Life/disability insurance.
        Holiday bonuses.
            Christmas gifts to all employees.
                 Funeral assistance for immediate family members.
                       Low cost uniform accessories, i.e. holsters, belts etc.

108
Not one employee in the NLRB proceedings of 1994 had anything derogatory to say about the Company other than the working conditions, which were something that no one could do anything about. We tried to make a difference in a way that was not done before and this resulted in disillusionment by some of the guards. There were expectations that could never be fulfilled, and frustration that no one cared. This is why it was felt that small steps could be taken that would result in some good having been made, and a promise of something better in the future that might be achieved.

There is absolutely no one that was ever involved in security that I know of who has done so much for their employees as we did. All you have to do is look at our brochure to see the appearance of the personnel and the ideas that we tried to accomplish.
Why spend the money if we were stealing?
Out of over 1500 current, former, part-time, terminated or disciplined employees, only two or three testified at this trial. One of them, Willie Blockson testified he had no partner, but right next to his time sheet was a list of the men that worked with him. Another was one that I never seen before, even though he testified that I was in a room alone with him for some time and he never spoke to me. Does this make any sense?
There is more than ample evidence that makes it abundantly clear that any good that was attempted already was destined to failure. The entire Guardian/Triad matter is a testament to the old adage that, "no good deed goes unpunished". The proverbial writing was on the wall, and was evident months before the concept of providing security at the Chicago Housing Authority ever occurred. The Guardian/Triad case was a roadmap or blueprint on how to do it right the second time you try. Renault Robinson failed and his student Vince Lane picked up where he left off to finish the job. If you think his motivations were to protect the residents of CHA, think again.

109
Lane was the one joined at the hip with the Nation of Islam on a shopping center in Chicago that went belly up. He gave them more than enough money in security work to pay off his debt to them. He also was tried and convicted of bank fraud in his other ventures and used to like to say that he was only working at the CHA for $1.00 a year. Although the salary was kind of low, the benefits were worth it! HUD finally showed Vince the door after the Jenner and Block report was about to be made public and the findings on Lane were not as kind as they could be.
In our case, we became the largest white security contractor in the Chicago Housing Authority. We are targeted and find that we were not the first white contractor to have gone through this ordeal, but are the first to be convicted for things that we did not do. We have arrived at the latter position by the programmed falsification, manufacture and withholding of a variety of evidence.

The stage is set.
Act One

It is infiltration. This is accomplished by the efforts of the FBI in order to corrupt. A target is needed. One is selected but is not the best because it is young, not an American citizen and has a hard time speaking English. The target has no formal education of any mention and offers no resistance because he thinks he is ingratiating himself with officials that can afford his some sort of status and importance.
This. however, is not enough. There is a need for more participation and more members. A net is cast to include additionaL less intellectual members of the ring in hopes of climbing the wrongs of the ladder to the very top. More are, indeed, snagged.
Act Two

Finds problems with the additional conspirators. More time is needed in order to develop and nurture the cast of characters into going right to the top and trapping the ringleaders themselves. A problem arises because it is determined that the conspirators are working for themselves and have their own agendas. What to do?
110
Act Three
Begins with the accumulation of a variety of evidence and the determination of what to do with it. If you don't have it, fake it. Make it fit! If you do have it, don't give it to them because it will show that no crime has been committed. Withhold, resist, lie, obfuscate, perjure or do anything you can to get the results that you need.
Act Four

Finds the characters beaming with the success that they wanted. A conviction, right or wrong. The methods used in Act three worked! End of this story, or is it? Something is wrong. Things are happening. They are unwinding. Our cast of characters are being defrocked and exposed for their misdeeds which is causing a reexamination.

The Final Act has not been written. The curtain has not yet come down, but it will.
(111)

EXHIBITS

Federal Security shooting video.
Chicago Housing Authority S. T.A.R. Program.
Case# 97-2000, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Case# 00 L 06317, Skrzypek v. Brewer et al.
Case# 01-1472, NLRB v. Skrzypek, DC Circuit Mandate.
Case# 13-CA-31155, NLRB v. Federal Security, (transcripts).
Federal Security company brochure.
Federal Security company video.
Case# 87 C 5096, March 28, 1995 Kenneth Kotz deposition, Page 243 lines 7 through 10.
Case# 87 C 5096, May 18, 1995 transcript, Page 7 lines 14 through 20.
Case# 87 C 5096, May 25, 1995, CHA Inspector General Christian R. Maerz deposition, pages 16-25.
Case# 87 C 5096, March 28, 1995 Kenneth Kotz deposition, page 44 lines 16-18.
Case#87 C 5096, May 28, 1995 Kenneth Kotz deposition, page 243 lines 15 and 16.
Case# 87 C 5096, April 20, 1995 CHA Chairman Vincent
Lane deposition pages 7 through 9.
Chicago Tribune Skrzypek letter to the editor.
Federal Security newsletters.
HUD Secretary Cisneros letter of appreciation.
Freedom of Information Request, United States Secret
Service.
FBI messenger receipt, computer "Monkey Virus".
Case# 00 L 006163, Monarch Security v. Walgreens.
Admiral Insurance letter to Brian Netols.
Winston & Strawn Pawlik de-briefings.
Bruce Ray Fisher death certificate and newspaper articles.
Henry Pawlik newspaper articles.
Henry Pawlik check register.
Case# 00 L 005248, Skrzypek v. Pawlik.
Winston & Strawn memorandum regarding computer entries after seizure.
Case# 85 D 4184, December 16,1997, Brian Netols court transcript, page 64 lines 14 through 19.
Chicago Housing Authority demand letters.
Case# 97 L 04758, Federal Security v. Chicago Housing Authority.
No search warrants as indicated in Brian N etols Opening Statement page 4 lines 8 and 9, "Built-in Swimming Pool," page 27, lines 19 through page 28 line 1, reference to "Indoor Pool and Opulence on the Inside".
Brian Netols handwritten notes, "Covert Searches of Cars".
Brian N etols memorandum regarding Judge Moran
"counseling" .
Attorney Elliot Samuels handwritten audiotape notes.
Steve Cain August 30, 2001 letter.
Anthony Pellicano newspaper articles.
Aisenberg Kidnapping Pellicano filings.
CBS 48 Hours Pellicano/Aisenberg video.
Anthony Pellicano Birmingham Alabama Case.
Skrzypek to Cain letter of understanding.
Herbert Joe January 22,2002 letter.
US Attorney evidence room materials.
Internal Revenue Service Agent Jose Franco.
FBI 302 T-Force Security.
Attorney Koch employee depositions.
Illinois Department of Professional Registration computer complaint screens regarding Dr. Martin Lanoff.
Case# WC 6209, James Shubalis v. Lawson Mardon Packaging, regarding Dr. Martin Lanoff.
48. Bethany Hospital discharge documents.

Northwestern Memorial Hospital Court Order for transportation.

Metropolitan Correctional Center record of medical care, February 11, 2002.

Metropolitan Correctional Center medications.

Bethany Hospital pain prescription.

Dr. John Liu, Assistant Professor of Neurology, Northwestern Memorial Hospital.

Grand Jury testimony of FBI Agent John Robert Shoup.

Grand Jury testimony of FBI Agent Timothy Hepperman.

First National Bank of Chicago, Check# 047518 date stamped PAID, August 7,1994, ISSUE DATE September 5,1994.

Remer and Associates report of under-billing.

Paul Ciolino FOIA requests and confidential report.

Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission Complaint regarding Defense Attorney Eric P Ferleger.

Glenview and Chicago Police Department reports, court documents, mug shots, and audiotape of Defense Attorney Eric P Ferleger.

Turnover Motion of Defense Attorney Eric P Ferleger.

Skrzypek Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission Complaint# 03 CI 3782 regarding Defense Attorney Eric P Ferleger.

Case# 03 L 9747, Ferleger v. Skrzypek

Vernon Hills Police Department reports, court documents and mug shot of Defense Attorney Eric P Ferleger.

November 19, 2004 Illinois Supreme Court Order M.R. 19711 regarding Defense Attorney Eric P Ferleger Disciplinary Action.

Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Board transcript of Defense Attorney Eric P Ferleger.

James Skrzypek, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, February1, 2002 discharge.

Walgreens Pharmacy prescriptions.

Northwestern Memorial Hospital nurse medication report.

Northwestern Memorial Hospital physical therapy evaluations.

Dr. Daniel Dunham, Northwestern Memorial Hospital neurosurgeon referral.

February 8, 2002 Court Order, Dr. Martin Lanoff physical examination.

Walgreens medications given to the FBI, January 11, 2002.

Attorney James Koch authorization request.

Dr. John Liu, Assistant Professor of Neurology, Northwestern Memorial Hospital.

Dr. Martin Lanoff complaint letter to the Illinois Department of Professional Regulation.

Inspector General letter to Janice Skrzypek.

Attorney Marc Martin Motion.

James Skrzypek preliminary motion.

US v. Palivos.