Quote from: k9quaint on May 21, 2013, 03:27:28 AM

Quote from: wrenchmonkey on May 21, 2013, 03:17:34 AM

Quote from: k9quaint on May 21, 2013, 03:02:16 AM

Quote from: wrenchmonkey on May 21, 2013, 02:44:40 AM

Quote from: k9quaint on May 21, 2013, 02:12:57 AM

Quote from: wrenchmonkey on May 21, 2013, 01:56:21 AM

Quote from: darkmule on May 21, 2013, 01:14:41 AM

Quote from: k9quaint on May 21, 2013, 01:01:32 AM

Tried, convicted, spent 14 months in jail, and is still on probation.
A bit more than an IRS witch hunt.

I'd generally let something like this slide if it was a long time ago and has nothing to do with what someone is doing now. For instance, if he ran a mail fraud 20 years ago and is now accused of robbing a bank, it isn't all that relevant.

However, when someone is running what looks awfully like the very mail fraud they were recently in prison for perpetrating, I am less inclined to cut slack and more inclined to think a leopard doesn't change its spots.

From what I've read, he was brought in to help run an already established self-funded off-shore gambling pool that the IRS wasn't a fan of, and was rounded up as a part of that. The two years in jail in Italy was while he was fighting an extradition order.

Again, I've seen enough people railroaded by the IRS for having the wrong politics to not give too much credence to a witch hunt that ended in a plea bargain.

Since when is the IRS in charge of "mail fraud"? The whole thing stinks of trumped up charges and a witch hunt. But of course, it's great fodder for the people who already have an ax to grind with BFL.

Wrenchmonkey has clearly not read the press releases, the charges filed by the department of justice, or the extradition order.
Or if he has, he is just willfully ignoring that it was the Department of Justice, the US Postal Inspector (in charge of hunting down mail fraud), and the IRS.
Notice how I posted links to actual public documents detailing the crime, investigation, trial, and conviction of Sonny. Notice how he rebutted this argument with "I read somewhere on the internet that Sonny was cool and the IRS was on a witchhunt".

Watching him perform mental gymnastics to polish the reputation (and probably the knob) of Sonny is hilarious.

Once again, I have no doubt that the IRS wrote up a real pretty bloviating inditement, they're good at that. It's about all they're good at. I'm not "polishing" his reputation, just observing what the good ol us.gov likes to do.

If anybody thinks that BFL is a fraud, don't order (or cancel your order and get a refund). Most people bringing it up don't actually believe it's a fraud, but just want to drag his name through the mud. OP included.

Except it was the Department of Justice who indicted him.
You could read the indictment here:
http://ia600409.us.archive.org/34/items/gov.uscourts.cacd.383556/gov.uscourts.cacd.383556.8.0.pdf
But you won't.

Don't let facts derail your sad little attempt to cover up the criminal record of Sonny. Please tell us more about "stuff you read somewhere on the internets about how Sonny is a great guy".

I never said Sonny is a "great guy". I've never met him. I said that it appears to be a witch hunt. You sure do like to distort other people's words, don't you. Go back to licking the windows, idiot.

Once again, cirtually nobody commenting actually believes that BFL is a fraud. They just have an ax to grind, and digging up dirt is the best way for them to accomplish that.

On what possible basis could you equate 5 guys convicted of a 20 million dollar mail fraud scheme that stole money from senior citizens to "a witch hunt"?
Please provide links to your evidence. I don't want to hear more of your "I read it somewhere on the internet".

Also, notifying potential investors in BFL of Sonny's conviction for fraud is not "dragging his name through the mud". Unless your name happens to be Sonny. Then I can understand why you are so upset that so many people have brought this up in threads about BFL. It would also make sense why you defend BFL no matter what the evidence against you is.

At least you haven't eaten at a 4 start restaurant.

Eaten at a 4 star restaurant? Yes, I have, actually. No idea what that's got to do with anything, but then again, you're an imbecile.

An inditement isn't actual evidence. It's just assertions made by the prosecuting side, who (in case you don't know) often make all sorts of baseless accusations and twistings of the truth in order to make their case. Like cops who charge people with "assault" for pulling away when they grab them, or "resisting arrest" for not bleeding enough when they get their faces slammed into the pavement.

I've read through plenty of legal documents in my time, and I know damn good and well that they're usually about 90% bullshit and 10% fluff...

It's possible that the charges were actually legit, but once again, they have precious little to do with this thread. But people with an ax to grind are hell bent on spreading FUD.

Now piss off. Those windows aren't gonna lick themselves!