David Bergstein and co-defendant Keith Wellner were arrested in California and New York respectively, according to the FBI. Bergstein is the chief executive of private equity firm Cyrano Group Inc. while Wellner is the former chief operating officer and general counsel of Weston Capital Asset Management, an advisory firm.

Prosecutors claimed the defendants allegedly defrauded Weston’s hedge fund investors by devising a plan to hide details about transactions that involved their funds. Bergstein and Wellner transferred money from one group of Weston investors to pay another. According to the indictment, they also used millions of investor dollars for their own benefit.

Bergstein and Wellner could face from five to 20 years in prison, in addition to hefty fines ranging from $10,000 to $5 million per offense. Wellner is a repeat offender who was prohibited from working in the securities industry after previously settling fraud charges with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Bergstein’s movie credits as executive producer include the 2004 comedy “The Whole Ten Yards” and 2015 film “In the Heart of the Sea.” Five of his movie companies went bankrupt in 2010, according to court records.

First, let’s cover federal law. Anyone convicted of a felony, other than certain white-collar crimes, is prohibited from owning a gun. The same applies to those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence against a spouse and those who, following a court hearing, are subject to a domestic violence restraining order. It does not apply in cases where a temporary restraining order is issued in advance of a hearing, nor to those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence against partners with whom they never lived.

A handful of states have passed laws to expand these restrictions to cover those convicted of certain other misdemeanors. In New York, these include “serious offenses” such as child endangerment, sex crimes and stalking. Some state legislators characterize the limited definition of “serious offenses” as a “loophole” in the law. The Democratic-controlled state Assembly has repeatedly passed bills to further expand the covered misdemeanors to include menacing, forcible touching and other offenses. The bill has so far not passed the Republican-controlled state Senate.

A 2013 state law requires convictions of the aforementioned additional misdemeanors to be reported to the state Division of Criminal Justice Services, which reports to the FBI, which in turn conducts background checks. But advocates of the Assembly bill say that without a concurrent state law, this notification requirement is unlikely to result in state and local police disarming convicts.

First, let’s cover federal law. Anyone convicted of a felony, other than certain white-collar crimes, is prohibited from owning a gun. The same applies to those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence against a spouse and those who, following a court hearing, are subject to a domestic violence restraining order. It does not apply in cases where a temporary restraining order is issued in advance of a hearing, nor to those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence against partners with whom they never lived.

A handful of states have passed laws to expand these restrictions to cover those convicted of certain other misdemeanors. In New York, these include “serious offenses” such as child endangerment, sex crimes and stalking. Some state legislators characterize the limited definition of “serious offenses” as a “loophole” in the law. The Democratic-controlled state Assembly has repeatedly passed bills to further expand the covered misdemeanors to include menacing, forcible touching and other offenses. The bill has so far not passed the Republican-controlled state Senate.

A 2013 state law requires convictions of the aforementioned additional misdemeanors to be reported to the state Division of Criminal Justice Services, which reports to the FBI, which in turn conducts background checks. But advocates of the Assembly bill say that without a concurrent state law, this notification requirement is unlikely to result in state and local police disarming convicts.

In early 2015, the FBI took control of a website known as Playpen which was used to distribute large amounts of child pornography. For two weeks after the seizure of the site, from February 20, 2015, to March 4, 2015, the FBI continued to operate the site in order to gather more evidence against more offenders. During that time, many thousands more sexual videos and images of children were downloaded.

To be clear, the FBI, by its own admission in court filings, literally distributed child pornography in an effort to capture offenders. The New York Times recently published several experts’ opinions on the matter, including law professors and anti-abuse advocates.

Corey Rayburn Yung of the University of Kansas School of Law argued that the government’s own position appears to be that every time child pornography is distributed or viewed, the victim is further harmed. For example, the Supreme Court held in Paroline v. United States that victims could seek restitution from mere possessors — not just distributors or creators — of child pornography. Yung also points out that in contrast to stings involving guns or drugs, the FBI cannot hope to contain the contraband in this case — it can be copied without limits.

Xavier Von Erck, an anti-child-abuse advocate, argued that the FBI’s actions may have prevented any number of future crimes from occurring. He said those who possess and distribute child pornography often are actively engaged in abuse of victims in their immediate area.

Clearly, the FBI is likely to use strategies like this again in future cases. Criminals and ordinary people’s ability to hide their online activities is increasing, and in the instances where authorities gain access to a potential trove of evidence, the temptation to make more arrests even at the cost of further victimization is enormous.

In early 2015, the FBI took control of a website known as Playpen which was used to distribute large amounts of child pornography. For two weeks after the seizure of the site, from February 20, 2015, to March 4, 2015, the FBI continued to operate the site in order to gather more evidence against more offenders. During that time, many thousands more sexual videos and images of children were downloaded.

To be clear, the FBI, by its own admission in court filings, literally distributed child pornography in an effort to capture offenders. The New York Times recently published several experts’ opinions on the matter, including law professors and anti-abuse advocates.

Corey Rayburn Yung of the University of Kansas School of Law argued that the government’s own position appears to be that every time child pornography is distributed or viewed, the victim is further harmed. For example, the Supreme Court held in Paroline v. United States that victims could seek restitution from mere possessors — not just distributors or creators — of child pornography. Yung also points out that in contrast to stings involving guns or drugs, the FBI cannot hope to contain the contraband in this case — it can be copied without limits.

Xavier Von Erck, an anti-child-abuse advocate, argued that the FBI’s actions may have prevented any number of future crimes from occurring. He said those who possess and distribute child pornography often are actively engaged in abuse of victims in their immediate area.

Clearly, the FBI is likely to use strategies like this again in future cases. Criminals and ordinary people’s ability to hide their online activities is increasing, and in the instances where authorities gain access to a potential trove of evidence, the temptation to make more arrests even at the cost of further victimization is enormous.

Cottom is the 19th man to be convicted of child pornography-related charges stemming from an FBI investigation into websites residing on the so-called “darknet.” The darknet comprises online websites and other resources accessible only with special software, usually Tor. Tor is anonymizing software that conceals the location and identity of servers (computers that host websites) and users.

Authorities conducted a lengthy and high-tech investigation that apparently overcame the anonymizing capabilities of the darknet and resulted in the seizure of three high-profile child pornography websites. Last January, the man convicted of operating the servers that hosted the websites, Aaron McGrath, was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

In a separate investigation, the FBI in November 2014 seized a number of darknet sites that functioned as black markets where users could obtain prescription drugs, cannabis and other substances. The agency is maintaining strict secrecy around the specific methods used to find the locations and operators of the sites, and the extent to which the Tor network is compromised remains unknown.

Tor is used to conceal communication for all manner of purposes. Criminals can use it to distribute child pornography, but others use it to obtain medication without a doctor’s prescription or medical cannabis in jurisdictions where it remains illegal. Journalists and ordinary citizens also use it to circumvent government restrictions on free speech or even hide from abusive spouses.

If you use Tor for any purpose, you should be aware of the possibility that the network has been permanently compromised by the FBI. And if you are accused of any computer-related crime, contact the Brill Legal Group.

Cottom is the 19th man to be convicted of child pornography-related charges stemming from an FBI investigation into websites residing on the so-called “darknet.” The darknet comprises online websites and other resources accessible only with special software, usually Tor. Tor is anonymizing software that conceals the location and identity of servers (computers that host websites) and users.

Authorities conducted a lengthy and high-tech investigation that apparently overcame the anonymizing capabilities of the darknet and resulted in the seizure of three high-profile child pornography websites. Last January, the man convicted of operating the servers that hosted the websites, Aaron McGrath, was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

In a separate investigation, the FBI in November 2014 seized a number of darknet sites that functioned as black markets where users could obtain prescription drugs, cannabis and other substances. The agency is maintaining strict secrecy around the specific methods used to find the locations and operators of the sites, and the extent to which the Tor network is compromised remains unknown.

Tor is used to conceal communication for all manner of purposes. Criminals can use it to distribute child pornography, but others use it to obtain medication without a doctor’s prescription or medical cannabis in jurisdictions where it remains illegal. Journalists and ordinary citizens also use it to circumvent government restrictions on free speech or even hide from abusive spouses.

If you use Tor for any purpose, you should be aware of the possibility that the network has been permanently compromised by the FBI. And if you are accused of any computer-related crime, contact the Brill Legal Group.

Police say that in March, April and May of 2015, Nassau County detectives received tips on the alleged activity from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. A subsequent investigation by Nassau and Suffolk County police and the FBI resulted in the arrest.

Kerniss was charged with four counts of possession of a sexual performance by a child and seven counts of promoting a sexual performance by a child.

Defense attorneys in this case will likely investigate whether the defendant had reason to believe the subjects of the images were of a lawful age and whether a third party may have accessed the defendant’s computer or Twitter account without his knowledge.

Possession and distribution of child pornography are serious charges. If you are accused of such crimes, it is important that you speak with an attorney before making any statements to the police. The attorneys at the Brill Legal Group have extensive experience in defending against computer-related criminal charges of all types.

Lee’s arrest followed a long investigation into his online life and persona. According to the local sheriff’s office, the county computer crimes unit discovered the suspect online as he attempted to solicit erotic favors from young men. A police officer posed as a 14-year-old boy and responded. Over the course of several emails, the suspect began asking the “boy” to meet with him for sex. A meet-up was arranged at a named location in Escambia, and when the suspect arrived, he was taken into custody. Police were unwilling to let the investigation linger, as Lee had allegedly made references to some of his very young patients during the exchanges.

Members of the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, launched to protect children against online predators, were present at the arrest. FBI agents, Pensacola detectives, Sheriff’s deputies and special agents attached to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement arrested and identified the suspect as family physician Brian Lee, the owner and operator of Perdido Bay Family Care. He was given no bond.

Upon further investigation, law enforcement uncovered evidence that Lee may have engaged in similar conduct with other young boys. They have put out a call to the general public asking for anyone who may have been involved with the physician to contact them.

In Florida, Statute 847.0135(4) states that any individual who travels any distance with the intention of engaging in illegal acts laid out in Chapter 794, 800 or 827 Florida Statutes — such as unlawful sexual conduct with a child or sex with another person “believed” to be a child — is guilty of a second-degree felony. These statutes apply even if the suspect was lured into a meeting through an electronic service.

Solicitation charges may also be filed against a parent, guardian or custodian who allows a child to participate in the sexual activities enumerated in the above statutes.

A number of defenses may be applicable for those facing such serious charges. A criminal defense lawyer should immediately acquire a complete record of any chat logs used as evidence against an alleged child predator.

The log may reveal illegal procedures, including entrapment and inadequately supported search warrants. The alleged offender’s intent and extenuating circumstances must also be taken into account. The testimony of a computer expert, if warranted, may also be of use in a defense.

No matter the charges, every person has the right to an attorney’s criminal defense. Not every individual who is arrested and/or charged is guilty of a crime. Never judge alleged offenders by their charges.

Thomas C .Grajek is a criminal defense lawyer in Tampa, Lakeland, and Polk County Florida. To contact a Lakeland criminal defense attorney or to learn more, visit http://www.flcrimedefense.com/ or call 863-688-4606.

Now, the FBI is investigating this DUI arrest.  TPD has begun its own “investigation” of its DUI unit.  So who is on this “”investigative team”?  A former circuit judge who rarely heard DUI cases in felony court.  A statewide prosecutor who’s office rarely handles DUI cases.  Someone from FDLE who recently had their own problems when the head of the Alcohol Testing Department, which is responsible for the integrity of Florida’s breath test machines, was forced to resign or was fired for her own issues.  Then there are two former DUI supervisors who are probably responsible for training the DUI unit currently in place.  Where are the DUI defense attorneys?  We are the ones that look at the issues with a critical eye and know what the problems are with DUI enforcement.  When an attorney files a Motion to Suppress and alleges that the officer violated a driver’s constitutional rights or misinterpreted the law, we are the ones training these officers.  DUI attorneys know the law better than anyone.  So I do not have a lot of confidence that this “investigation” will improve the DUI unit’s performance at all.

If you have been arrested for DUI, call a Polk County DUI defense lawyer that is ready and has the knowledge to fight for you in court!

Polk DUI lawyer Thomas C. Grajek 863-838-5549 cell

 Because you only have 10 days to request a Formal Review and keep driving!

Now, the FBI is investigating this DUI arrest.  TPD has begun its own “investigation” of its DUI unit.  So who is on this “”investigative team”?  A former circuit judge who rarely heard DUI cases in felony court.  A statewide prosecutor who’s office rarely handles DUI cases.  Someone from FDLE who recently had their own problems when the head of the Alcohol Testing Department, which is responsible for the integrity of Florida’s breath test machines, was forced to resign or was fired for her own issues.  Then there are two former DUI supervisors who are probably responsible for training the DUI unit currently in place.  Where are the DUI defense attorneys?  We are the ones that look at the issues with a critical eye and know what the problems are with DUI enforcement.  When an attorney files a Motion to Suppress and alleges that the officer violated a driver’s constitutional rights or misinterpreted the law, we are the ones training these officers.  DUI attorneys know the law better than anyone.  So I do not have a lot of confidence that this “investigation” will improve the DUI unit’s performance at all.

If you have been arrested for DUI, call a Polk County DUI defense lawyer that is ready and has the knowledge to fight for you in court!

Polk DUI lawyer Thomas C. Grajek 863-838-5549 cell

 Because you only have 10 days to request a Formal Review and keep driving!

Napolitano testified at a recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, where she stated that a comprehensive bill now with Congress earmarks additional funds to better secure the nation’s borders, establishes employer verification for employee identities, and launches newly designed systems which will track residents when they leave the U.S. Napolitano believes the new bill will help streamline the route for the 11 million undocumented immigrants to become legal citizens. While critics argue that the proposal will only reward people who have broken the law, Napolitano countered that in order to better protect the country, it makes sense to have everyone be accounted for – even illegal immigrants. If people know they will be able to interact with law enforcement officers without the automatic assumption that they will be deported, it will increase their ability to report crimes and come forward if and when they witness anything of concern.

The secretary’s support for legislation included testimony that meeting the drafted border security goals would be the first step in the path to citizenship. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., authored the bill, and stated that he was also looking at amending the bill to require more stringent background checks for those immigrants flagged as “higher risk,” including immigrants who come to the U.S. requesting asylum. Napolitano has stated that the current U.S. asylum has a number of stringent safeguards which have been put in place over the past four years, including extensive interviewing and vetting, a comprehensive database system, fingerprinting and an additional vetting system when green card legibility is granted.

Critics of the bill stated that it may not better secure U.S. borders and do much to change the number of undocumented immigrants who come to the U.S. every year. Iowa Republican Senator Chuck Grassley expressed concern that the bill’s border security provisions would not actually do much, as millions of immigrants now in the U.S. illegally would be granted provisional legal status, without further investigation. Critics pointed out that immigration services and the FBI failed to properly check Boston bombings suspects Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, brother who first came to the US a decade ago. It is now suspected that Tamerlan Tsarnaev traveled to and from Russia, but a spelling error on his passport kept him from being flagged for further investigation. Napolitano countered that the new system would include electronic scanning, which would eliminate that sort of error from happening again.

A. Banerjee is a Houston immigration attorney in Texas. Before selecting an lawyer, contact the Law Offices of Annie Banerjee by visiting their website at http://www.visatous.com.

<!– Social Buttons Generated by Digg Digg plugin v5.3.0,
Author : Buffer, Inc
Website : http://bufferapp.com/diggdigg –>