SUBORNED PERJURY IN "TTRE" by BREEN and witness, TERRELL
by Anthony Elgindy
Greetings to all,
One of the things that I promised to do long ago was to publish and post publicly the various lies, suborned perjury and crimes committed by my former Prosecutor, Kenneth Breen and the various witnesses that he coached to testify. Since I have already done most of this work and it seems that I have some time here before the appeal is heard, I figured this is a good time to make good on that promise.. I’m going to start out with the small stuff and get to the big stuff as we go...
In this post you will be seeing a witness testify about one of my stock trading calls in a stock that traded under the TTRE ticker symbol. It involves a cooperating witness who took the stand and testified that I was taking credit for a trading call that I didn’t make, something that he claimed I used to do, something he called "adopt a call"...In this interchange BREEN presented two snippets of chat that are separated by 31 minutes on a specific day.....The testimony and the record will show that BREEN knew that the testimony he was eliciting was totally false and when he was caught, he was admonished by the court....
Im going to start gradually here and build up to the really really big crimes as I go along....In one of the most brazen attempts by the government to elicit testimony of manipulation that they knew to be false, former site member and government witness, Don Terrell, aka "Quack" is shown 2 chat snippets from August 6, 2001(GX 172). \
The first one ends at 15:25 and the second one begins 31 minutes later at 15:56, showing Mr. Elgindy making a "cover call" to close a short position on TTRE (One of the alleged relevant conduct stocks);
Elgindy sent out the following "email broadcast", " TTRE<---Official cover @ $2.30 from $6(TR 3870)(GX-DC-172)
Mr. Terrell goes on to say that Mr. Elgindy wasn't the one who called TTRE as a short, he himself made the call.(known by site members as a "Quack call")(TR 3870)
Q: What is Mr. Elgindy doing here?
A: He is taking credit for the call
Q: Did you have a name for that?
A: Adopt-A-Call
Q: What did that mean?
A: That means he took credit for the call even though he didn't make it
Q: Was that in order for Mr. Elgindy to show that he is controlling the site
A: Yes
However, the missing chat section between these snippets reveals the true context. It was Mr. Terrell himself who was reminding me that I had made a short call previously in TTRE, but never called a "cover", so I should do it now, since it was profitable for those who may still be short. I was only doing what Quack himself asked me to do..I wasn’t trying to take credit for anything nor adopt anyone else’s "call"..
When my attorney attempted to introduce the omitted 31 minutes in between, the government vehemently objected, claiming that the defense hadn't designated that particular chat section, before trial.(TR 3953)
Mr. Levine lamented " That this is exactly the kind of problem we were worried about before trial" to which Defense counsel defended his use of the missing section because the omitted section shows the "testimony isn't true", and "extremely misleading." He was "surprised" the government would do something like this. Mr. Levine goes on to say that the middle section should be excluded because it suggests the government was purposely doing things "out of context" and show somehow there is "something nefarious" going on. Of course, that is exactly what was going on.
The Court answered; "You brought it out, my friend, it doesn't pass the straight face test, ..."DX-11515 is received in evidence"(TR 3953)
Mr. Terrell was then put back on the stand;
Q: To put in context, the official cover here, which you claimed was Mr. Elgindy's claiming credit to control the site was at 15:56, correct?
A: that's correct
Q: Sir, now I would like to show you the chat that was in between the two chats that the government showed you sir, I would like you to begin reading now the chat that begins at 15:38
A: Quack; AP please close your TTRE, you have an open short from the 6's a long time ago
Q: now read your entry at 15:39
A: Make it official
Q: Then continue down to Anthony at 15:40
A: I called TTRE a long time ago but never held it
Q: Then pick up with your last 3 comments
Mr. Terrell goes on to say, "well some did and it's open", "Please close it". I then went ahead and sent out the "official" Email Broadcast closing TTRE out at $ 2.30
Q: So, Mr. Elgindy's actions fourteen minutes later in calling the official cover was him simply doing what you asked him to do, correct ?
A: Yes
The evidence is clear, it is compelling and it is beyond any doubt, this wasn't evidence that I was controlling the site or taking credit away from others. To the contrary, it is undeniable proof that the government knowingly and intentionally showed one of their witnesses two chat excerpts while never showing him the important contextual information contained in between. The witness, with the government's full knowledge, then manufactured testimony that seemed to fit and inculpates me of wrong doing when the government knew the truth all along and knew exactly what was between these two excerpts shown to Mr. Terrell.
The Constitution requires prosecutors to seek justice rather than victory as the Supreme Court affirmed. It has long been established that the prosecution's "deliberate deception of a court and jurors by the presentation of known false evidence is incompatible with rudimentary demands of justice." (Banks V. Dretke, US 668, 124 S.Ct. 1256, US 2004)(Gvt Sent Mem Attach D pp 83)
Stay tuned, there is a lot more coming..........
tony |
