- 22 -
The letter further reported on the status of the cases as
follows:
The Motions for Leave to File Motions to Vacate
were granted as to cases not on Appeal and a similar
Motion (to remand rather than vacate judgment) is
pending in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as to the
cases on Appeal.
More recently, J. Goeffe [sic] has denied the
Motion to vacate. He has decided that the newly
disclosed “Contingent Settlements” would not change his
ruling in any material way.
On July 6, 1992, Messrs. O’Donnell and Jones entered their
appearances on behalf of petitioners in the present cases.
In a letter dated July 31, 1992, Mr. Kersting updated the
situation for Kersting program participants. He advised that Mr.
Izen and another attorney, Robert Patrick Sticht (Mr. Sticht),
were “exposing the government’s fraud and perfidy in a secret
deal between Cravens and Thompson on the one hand, and IRS
attorney McWade (and other government officials) on the other
hand.” Mr. Kersting explained his version of the misconduct of
the Government’s attorneys as follows:
As many of you already know, the growing scandal in the
“piggyback” cases involves a settlement in favor of
Cravens/Thompson in exchange for their damaging
testimony and exhibits that were all put together as
part of a prearranged plan to influence and persuade
Judge Goffe to rule against us. * * *
Also in July 1992, Mr. DeCastro filed a motion for entry of
decision in the Thompson case reflecting the terms of the new
agreement he had reached with Mr. McWade shortly before trial,
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011