Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Sunday, April 16, 2006

Jared's Orange

Sydney Morning Herald mentioned Jared Paul Stern had various levels of protection, as if Stern were offering a Rep. Cunningham-like menu for payoffs.

Like Stern, 110-count-indicted Hollywood private eye Anthony Pellicano would get celebrity gossip information and promise to do "interference." [ Video ]

Then it struck me: The people who were going to get this money had to get the money. That's the point: What happened next?

The story then falls apart.

[ E-mail ]

Jared & Ruth Stern
8284 State Route 81
Oak Hill, NY 12460-5312
(518) 239-6565

Photographs of family: [ Click ]

The GeoLocation for Jared's 1870's Catskill's home -- if it were located on Mars -- would be: [ here ]

[ Neighbors ]

[ Previous addresses ]

Here's the big issue with Jared's case: His attorney is an expert in defending clients over bribery and unofficial gifts. [ See 775 N.Y.S.2d 827, Tacopina ]

Why is Jared's lawyer letting his client talk; you'd think an attorney would be able to manage his client. Or are we saying that Jared's paying his attorney to be quiet? His attorney had a problem with another client talking too much. Looks like Joe didn't learn his lesson. Ooops.

Let's back up. Stern has a clothing line. He's also using his business connections for cross purposes: Using his media-hat to meet prospective “investors”.

At the same time he’s likely doing the opposite: Using his clothing-contacts to get information on the modeling, entertainment world. No mystery there.

The issue is that Burkle – his alleged extortion target – is under the SEC rules. This means that the potential issue is much larger.

We’re not talking about simply cash transfers. We’re talking corporate governance issues, Elliot Spitzer, Securities.

Then I think I understand why the US Attorney and FBI aren’t moving. They don’t have to. The goal of an alleged criminal investigation is to gather information and put people in jail.

The issue is who’s playing whom.

DoJ has various undercover informants who they pay nifty sums to.

At this point, all bets are off on who is actually working for whom. It is possible that the public version is completely opposite, and that there’s a hidden set of players here, namely a second government agency that is using either Stern or Burkle.

Obviously, this is wild speculation. But what seems odd is that we’re asked to conclude – with definiteness – that because no arrest has been made, then Stern is innocent.

Hold on. The investigation may or may not be over. And we also don’t know what else is going on.

* * *

Let’s think worst case. Suppose Burkle believed he was being setup, and then decided to move first.

At the same time, look at the various levels that Jared referred to. Those different levels refer to different people who would at some point get money. What happens next?

Obviously, that money – that is moved for the various levels of protection – does one of two things: It either stays put, or it moves.

That’s where the Patriot Act, National Security Letters, and wire transfers come in.

* * *

Look again at the various levels of protections. What we do know is that Jared stated the various people who would get the money. At some point, they would have to know what is going on; or their name would have to appear in the transaction. Namely, their bank account, or some sort of financial interest – connected to this other person – would have to be connected, however remotely to the transferred funds.

This means that the person who was receiving and benefiting from the fund transfer would have to know that the funds were supposed to be there in that account; that the funds were related to something; and that the funds were/could be used.

Why would the FBI and US Attorney do anything, when the potential people who are already under investigation are publicly commenting. This simply makes the FBI’s job easier.

* * *

Think broadly in terms of what else may be going on. Consider the cavalier nature with which we are asked to believe Stern and Burkle discussed the various levels of protection. This implies that the arrangement – from the perspective of Stern – was already well understood, thought through, and something he could rattle off without appearing to be amazed by his own revelations.

In other words, it appears he’s done this before. At this juncture we can only speculate.

But the available public record suggests just that: That Stern has done this before, he’s involved others, and that the various levels of protection – with those fund transfers – would be well known to the people who would benefit.

In other words, what we may be witnessing is the mid-to-late-end of an ongoing FBI investigation into other fund transfers which Stern may have already been involved. Obviously, we have no idea of knowing.

* * *

Here’s the rub: Let’s suppose that the FBI suspects that Stern has done this before – as Cunningham was doing with is menu-bribery-list. The FBI already has the legal authority to use a national security letter to trace all the funds.

The issue becomes: Who was Stern talking to, how does his cell phone records compare with his public news stories, and what funds are actually moving from various people to the people Stern has already identified as the beneficiaries.

It appears the FBI is imply letting Stern jabber away, further widening the net onto the potential number of people who would – or should – know that the funds were transferred not because of any bonafide work, but for non-work. In other words, if someone is going to get paid to do something that they should not do – or paid funds to avoid doing that they might otherwise do, then we have something interest.

There are three issues: Where is money coming from; who is making the payments; and what information – that might otherwise appear in Page 6 – would not appear.

* * *

Enter Elliot Spitzer, corporate governance, and the auditors. Funds have a curious thing about them. They are either there or they are not.

If you have money sitting in a bank account, you’re either using it, or you’re not. Conversely, if you’re spending money you either are spending your own, or your spending someone else’s money.

That’s where Jared appears to have an issue. When the auditors look at funds transfers, they don’t simply look at what is going in and out; rather, they also look at your expenditures. If Jared’s expenditures are out of line with what he’s being paid, the issue isn’t whether he is or isn’t getting kickbacks. The issue is whether he’s getting paid money – out of the financial system – that he is spending.

this is where we get into issue of taxation in declared income. Suppose the issue at this point is the FBI and the IRS suspect that funds are getting transferred, and that someone is spending money that they’re declaring is investment. This might be an issue for taxes.

On the other hand, if the people who are getting the money are spending it, then there may be no problem. The issue is once that wire transfer occurs, the money moves from an original location to the person. This means that the issue at this point may not be what is or isn’t transferred, but from where the money is getting transferred from.

Bluntly, the issue at this point may be that the FBI is looking at whether someone in NY City or other government is using the connection with Page Six to avoid pubic disclosure of facts that the public should otherwise know; and at the same time possibly using public funds to pay off Stern and others. We can only speculate.

* * *

This is where the US Attorney and open media and blogosphere will need to compare notes at some point.

Namely, the issue will be to see if there’s a way to publicly track the funds and expenditures of the people on the menu list; then compare their public expenditures with what they say they’re getting paid. Again, the issue here isn’t to go on a wild goose chase. Rather, it’s to get a sense of what kind of funds could feasibly be transferred above and beyond what we’re led to believe is going on.

Here’s what’s possible: There could very well be government, city, and public officials who are using their access to the contracting system to send funds to Jared. We don’t know that.

Also, what could be going on is campaign contributions could be getting siphoned off for “investment” purposes; but the issue is that there’s no bonafide return, nor any actual consideration fro the contact.

Further, when accounting for these transactions, the issue becomes whether the transfers were publicly documented as X, but were known to be Y. Suppose there’s a government office or a corporation – other than what we know – that has had funds transferred. The issue become whether the auditing and accounting department – as documented in the ledgers – correctly reports the purpose, amount, and real nature of the transaction.

Usually people don’t put down in a ledge, “Money paid to Jared so he’ll be nice.” Rather, they may be calling it something else like, “Investment,” all the while knowing that the money that’s being transferred isn’t going to the business, but is actually going to level-3 receivers.

The other thing to look is once the money arrives – whether that is for the person, or in the “investment” – is to see if those funds are used in that way. Namely, if the sending ledger says that the funds were for an investment, but the wired funds – connected to that ledger entry – go somewhere else, or are used in a different manner that will raise some eyebrows.

Again, recall the FBI can use National Security Letters for anything, even on issues related to public corruption. They can look at whether the funds were transferred from corporations r other businesses or entities that are outside the original discussion. Again, the issue will be the timing of the calls, meetings, and who was or was not present at the meetings.

At this point, only Burkle has come forward. Likely, there are others out there who have been given the same menu. They may or may not realize what else is going on; and for that matter, they probably have no interest in admitting they’ve sent money in order to avoid questions or disclosure.

That’s where we come back to Jared’s menu, the list of options, the accounts were the money was sent, and what is actually going on with the money.

If the court finds that both parties have an illegal contract, then they may not do anything to help anyone else. That’s a civil issue.

ON the other hand, if the FBI is simply waiting – and doing their other audits as is expected – they could feasibly let this go on for six years. When it comes to issues of public malfeasance or corruption, the statute of limitations if very long.

I wouldn’t take the fact that Jared is or isn’t talking as a sign of whether he’s innocent. Rather, there may be other things going on that Jared can’t change and he could be putting a best face forward.

What we do know is despite the known FBI knowledge of this conversation, Jared is still talking. That means that despite his high statute, public profile, private business, and work as a writer he’s still talking without an attorney. Does that mean he’s innocent or guilty? No, it just means that Jared doesn’t appear to have comprehended the potential other issues which law enforcement and the securities regulators may be checking.

* * *

Based on what little we know, we make the following judgments, and opinions:

  • Sterns has done this before; there are other wire transfers that the FBI is reviewing;

  • Stern is more interested in the potential publicity opportunity – in terms of his career and business – than he is in protecting his legal rights;

  • Stern does not appear to have an understanding of the probable cause the initial recordings would have to have a broader tax and business review of all the people supposedly [a] related to the business; [b] in alleged receipt of the funds on the various levels; or [c] in receipt of subsequent wire transfers from Jared, others, or his business.

  • Stern does not appear to have an attorney who is aggressively defending Stern’s business and legal interests, which is something the FBI hopes to continue so that Stern will continue to talk, make slips, and provide other areas for the FBI to follow-up, if they choose.

    Whether the US Attorney or FBI do or do not comment is irrelevant. The US Attorney’s office is not aware of everything the FBI does. FBI regularly interfaces with people who provide information and these are never disclosed to the US Attorney, and the FBI will review at their own pace other issues which may or may not be urgent.

    * * *

    Here’s what law enforcement has probably done with the recordings:

  • Used them as a probable cause to expand discovery and seize evidence related to other wire transfers, other people involved, and those who may have received funds;

  • Subpoenaed cell phone records

  • Determine who paid the funds

    They have several goals inter alia:

  • Goal 1. Understand the terms and conditions of payments, transfers;

  • Goal 2. Understand whether the people paying the money understood those fund transfers to be legitimate business interests, or related to payoffs with the goal of suppressing information;

  • Goal 3. Determine whether any of the information that was suppressed was related to any criminal activity – no brainer;

  • Goal 4. Determine whether the funds transfers were part of a legal contract or something involving other terms and conditions contrary to public policy;

  • Goal 5. How were the “investors” paid profits or other non-monetary benefits; this would raise issue of taxation, reporting, or whether the original business was or was not legitimate;

  • Goal 6. Were the disclosure requirements followed, were the risks disclosed, or was this known to be a non-bonafided contract;

  • Goal 7. What relationship do the refunds transfers have on the market efficiency, the pricing of goods, advertising rates offered, or any uncompetitive practices in the newspaper business;

  • Goal 8. Who else was transferring funds; and

  • Goal 9. Which entities – knowingly or unknowingly – were the source of the funds; and how do the fund transfers/ “investments” fall outside what is permissible for public officials, or corporate officers.

    * * *

    What is clear is that Jared’s wearing at least two different, conflicting hats, possibly more.

  • 1. Hat 1: He’s representing himself as a member of the media;

  • 2. Hat 2: He’s representing himself as a businessman.

  • 3. Hat 3: Possibly Jared has an undisclosed relationship with law enforcement, and could be on the transmitting/receiving end of some valuable tips and information law enforcement is interested in.

  • 4. Hat 4: Possibly Jared has a new hat, and may not realize that the people that he’s working with are not who they are, but actually more aligned with the Federal and state officials. In other words, Jared may have been more than simply set up – Jared may have been the only person involved, and all the other players are actively cooperating with officials. We can only speculate.

    * * *

    Here’s what’s odd: Jared openly discussed the various levels of protection, and makes it appear as though the people who will get the funds are fully aware that the funds will show up, and this is to be expected.

    The issue Jared will have to wonder about: Have those who have received the money already talked to law enforcement?

    * * *

    Here’s what the public needs to consider:

  • 1. How much transferred money is actually linked with public officials in a desire to prevent disclosure of information related to elections;

  • 2. Extent to which campaign funds – if any – have been provided;

  • 3. The nature of the profit and investment risks Jared has disclosed;

  • 4. The alternatives the public can rely on to get information related to important decisions.

    Ultimately, these will be issues the public will have to debate, and the individual citizens will have to make their own decisions. These are issues of public policy, person investment, and risk tolerance.

    The way forward is to remember: The people that you’re dealing with in the entertainment business sometimes forget whether they are on the stage or somewhere else.

    * * *

    Couple of other things: Notice what Jared says when he comments on Burkle. He doesn’t flat out say, “He’s paranoid.” Rather, Jared is saying, “I think he’s paranoid.” That’s qualified meaning he’s not asking the public to take it as fact, but it is a defense to a defamation claim in re asserting Burkle has a medial problem or suffers from some sort of mental condition.

    Public needs to go back to ask Jared about what he’s saying: Why isn’t he being confidence and specific with his allegations; why is he qualifying what he’s saying. The answer appears as though Jared knows how to smear others asserting the 1st Amendment; he doesn’t appear to know what to do when the spotlight is turned on him. Jared, not his attorney, are talking.

    Also, Jared first appears to have represented that the “blip” in the clothing sales was modest. Now it appears he’s focusing on whether Burkle does or doesn’t like the clothes. Maybe it’s time to wait outside the clothing factory, and find out whether the shipments and driver deliveries are increasing above normal; and how the throughput and the energy consumption rates at the production plants are or are not supporting these claims.

    Jared knows how to quibble. He also likes to talk. So do others.

    * * *

    It’s unethical – although not illegal – to get paid not to report information you’re otherwise paid to report. It is another matter whether the FBI and regulators are irritated by this to let Jared make more mistakes. Jared appears to be more interested in publicity and his personal business interests than in defending those interests before the legal system.

    Rather than charge him for what has or hasn’t happened, there may be others willing to come forward:

  • Are you aware of Jared presenting this offer to others; and

  • Is the information you hoped to suppress far less significant than the possibility you have of sharing with others information that shows a wider pattern of abuse.

    The reason why these types of “deals” are offered is that people perceive they are in a position to lose something if they do what’s right – report to law enforcement was it really going on. The US Attorney and law enforcement can’t offer or promise you anything.

    All that can be promised to you is that if you let the truth out, others may have the courage to come forward, share their story, and this type of abuse will end. The reason that reporters appear to act like the mafia is that the public doesn’t have the information needed to pass legislation that would prevent this abuse.

    Imagine if you were someone like Mr. Burkle who was minding your own business – literally – and then someone allegedly harassed you over trivial matters; then offered to stop that abuse if you paid them. I think you’d be annoyed – not simply by the harassment, but by the fact that someone would have the gall to knowingly engage in abuse of others, simply with the hopes of getting something in return if they stopped.

    Here’s my vote: It’s time to turn the tables on Page Six. This will start the discussion on how this is going to be done.

    I encourage you to publicly post information about any scrap of information you have about Jared, any conversation, anything you have. In the end, the blogosphere can put the pieces together.

    Jared’s problem is that he has no clue what he has awoken. He isn’t simply dealing with people who are forced to put up with this. Rather, they have the inner confidence that there is a better way.

    Maybe gossip is the lifeblood of America. Perhaps the public is willing to pay any price. The issue is whether the public has a right to demand that individuals be subjected to abuse, threats, and other allegedly illegal conduct simply for information.

    I say: Let Page Six publish it all; and in turn let the public learn the full story of what the gossip columnists are doing.

    Recall what happened in California: It was only when there were repeated abuses that the anti-Stalking statutes were passed.

    If that’s what this nation needs to end this abuse, then let’s have an open discussion about this.

    The time is to make the gossip columnists the point of the discussion. If you dare to join the public discussion, you’re free. Open up an anonymous blog, and share every piece of detail and information you have about Jared.

    Then we can spread the discussion into the other gossip columnists, and find out what their tactics are. If they truly believe they are the mafia, then let’s treat them like that: Encourage there be undercover operations, statutes, and public support for the efforts to get rid of this abuse, corruption, and kickbacks.

    It’s time for the gossip columnists to decide: Are they entertainers, or are they criminals. The public appears to be ready to decide that you are more like scam artists, willing to abuse others. They call that a protection racket. There was no real protection. Rather, it was about destruction.

    America can do better.

    * * *

    When someone wears multiple hats, you’re never quite sure which hat they want you to wear. It’s one thing to call yourself a media outlet. It’s quite another to say your in business. But still quite another to find out you receive information form law enforcement and government, for your own purposes and not for the interests of the public.

    Someone appears to have a loyalty issue. Are they more loyal to their own interests, or that of those the supposedly serve. In the case of Jared, it’s not clear whether he’s an employee – and loyal to media ethics – or whether he’s working for himself – and loyal to a different, conflicting set.

    Either way, the two hats clash. I suspect Jared will continue to dance on the stage long enough for us to get a good laugh.

    * * *

    Enough of the pleasantries, let’s talk to Jared.


    Your problem is that you don’t know the problem that you’re in. If you did, you’d be deferring all your calls to your attorney. That’s your issue.

    The other problem you have is that you have no idea how quickly the FBI and IRS can data mine the entire set of accounts. Even if you refuse to cooperate, you’ve given the public enough information to find out the bank accounts of the people who are supposedly reviewing; and enough information to tip people off to watch out for wire transfers related to your cell phones and other meetings.

    There’s no telling how many other people you’ve done this to. The fact that someone is or isn’t nice to you really is no consequence. At this point, in my personal opinion, if we ever cross paths I’ll be sure to treat you like the alleged criminal you appear to be.

    Let’s be specific. It’s clear that you’ve got to various training sessions on this approach to gathering news. It’s truly amazing that you get paid – outside your legitimate business – to what appears to be to create chaos, start crisis, and get people to spread their thoughts.

    The public now knows your name. You have a public record: Your writing. Each of your words can be carefully reviewed to analyze where you are coming from, what your weaknesses are, and what needs to be done to ensure you remain within a very narrow lane of lawful activity.

    Whether you do or do not decide to stay in the media-entertainment business if of no concern. The issue is that you openly brag that you’re “like the mafia” and expect the public to roll over and put up with this. You miscalculated.

    Whether you do or do not believe you were “set up” is irrelevant. The issue is whether you had this coming. From all accounts – based on the apparent multiple times you have done this – it appears as though there is quite a list of people who you’ve “done” this to.

    The issue for the public will be – are we interested in your story – or are we more interested in hearing the story of those who can tell us what else you’ve done, what else you’ve said, and what else you’ve offered or not done.

    They’re out there. They’re obviously intimidated to keep quiet. Your problem – as with all you’re alleged targets – is how can you be sure that they’re going to be quiet about you.

    Or is that the other side of the story: That you’re paying someone to keep quiet about what you’re doing?

    Jared, you have a problem. You have a distinct name. There’s a lot that can be figured out. If you want to find out more, you’ll have to come back. Everything we find out about you is going up here. Everything.

    Congratulations, you’re on Constant’s list. Don’t worry, nothing illegal will be done; and you are not in any physical harm. Your life in not in jeopardy.

    * * *

    Going forward, here’s what we in the blogosphere need to start doing: putting together a timeline of where Jared has gone, who he’s talked to, and any information you have about his business.

    We’re looking for anything related to fund transfers, telephone calls, any thing related to his travel, and who he’s interviewed, and written stories about.

    The goal at this point is to find patterns in what he’s covering and talking about. For example, if there’s a recurring pattern of issues he covers, the question will be – is Jared not talking about similar issues on other people?

    The point here isn’t to dig into private lives. The point here is to find out how much money Jared’s actually been given to not cover these issues.

    This is what’s needed:

  • IP numbers

  • Copies of e-mails

  • Associates at the Post, with contact information

  • Information on his business, material/inventory delivery shipment times, and energy utilization for his office, budgets, meeting minutes, signed policy statements, audit results

  • Psychological assessment

  • Patterns of coverage in the media: Topics

  • Travel times

  • Timelines on his meetings, stories, who he’s talked to

  • Any scrap of information about his habits, what his preferences are, and even the reason that he’s changed cologne. Everything he does has a reason. It’s our job to make adverse inferences about what he refuses to publicly discuss.

  • I want to know the name of his Barber, his hair stylist, the reason he buys his groceries in one store but not the other

    I don’t care how trivial the issue is. Your job is to get that information up, and let’s compare notes. Let’s find out what Jared is all about, why he thinks he can act like this, and whether the public needs to have some better legislation to ensure this type of abuse doesn’t occur.

    Jared, when you become a public figure on gossip, you reasonably lose all right to have your private life protected. Rather, your private life is now public. You can’t credibly claim your privacy is invaded, especially when you do not respect the privacy of others or do what you’re doing.

    Anything that Jared has ever done or threatened needs to be discussed and public. The public needs to decide whether this is appropriate. If what Jared is doing is appropriate and lawful, then that needs to be done to him. On the other hand, if it not appropriate and illegal then that conduct needs to be reviewed by the court.

    It’s the job of the public to find out the full range of what Jared does. If he says it is “OK” for him to do it – then it is our job to remind him that we can – and will – do the same back to him. He cannot live in a fishbowl of double standards. It is time for the world to lawfully give Jared not merely a taste, but a full course meal of what he appears to have done to many others.

    The days of abusing people are going to come to an end, Jared. I will guarantee you that when this is done, you’re going to wish you had never talked about getting paid for protection. It doesn’t matter what you have to justify what you’re doing.

    The bottom line is that you’re either going freely end this; or you’re going to wish that you never gave anybody the idea that what you’re doing is acceptable.

    You have two options: Freely stop doing what you’re doing, or you’ll be lawfully forced to stop. The game is over.

    It’s time to turn Jared into a Page 6 celebrity, and force him to endure what he has forced others to endure. The blogosphere has a bad habit of never relenting.

    You wished this.

    * * *

    It now begins

    “He is sorry to leave New York, and despite his near-heroic imbecility,
    by the end we're sorry to see him go.”

    -- JPS, reviwing Toby Young's "HOW TO LOSE FRIENDS & ALIENATE PEOPLE" in "F Troop Meets the A List By Jared Paul Stern" Wall Street Journal, 02 Jul 02,

    Jared Factoids

    Born Philadelphia, PA

    Raised in Canada

    Education: Claims to have graduated from Bennington College, VT in 1994 [Verify: (802) 447-2025 » 425 Main Street » Bennington, VT 05201] Location of microbrew on Mn Street: [ Click ]

    Possible Hangout: 1990-1994: Given Jared's fascination with the 1940s film and suits, Jared likely visited a 40's vintage diner trailer on Route/Rte 7: Sonny's The Blue Ben Diner, 102 Hunt Street, Bennington, Vt. 802-442-5140] [" An authentic dining-car diner that coddles the local culture of hippies and farmers with everything from burgers to tabouli." Note: Ruth mentioned the "hippies" in the the NYT times piece.] Given the diner is only 2 miles from his alma mater, we judge at 90% probability Jared has eaten at this diner. [Directions Click ]

    Reportedly Admires: Walter Winchell--pro-McCarthy [ Wiki ] For Contrast, see Clooney's film about Anti-McCarthy Murrow: [ Ref ]

    Clothing: three-piece suits

    Favorite Hat: Fedora

    Dog border collie, Hanna, [Misspelled: "Hannah"]

    Other: Cruella the cat; and ferrets named Fritz and Raffles

    Wife: Former Ruth Gutman, of Maine; Nickname: "Snoodles" [1942 The Palm Beach Story] [ Ref ]

    Home: "1870's Carpenter Gothic" About $200,000, 3 bedroom, "cottage", four [4] acres, 2,500-square-foot fixer-upper [Furniture improvements, Dining room: Orange ]

    Jared & Ruth Stern
    8284 State Route 81
    Oak Hill, NY 12460-5312
    (518) 239-6565

    [ Neighbors ]

    Former Residences: Southshore, Long Island; New Canaan CN; Bellport [ Previous addresses ]

    Source: Ernie Koy, Home: Catskills

    MARC SANTORA, NYT: Stern lives in Oak Hills [ NYT ]

    ADAM GOLDMAN, AP: "Stern lives on farmhouse in the Catskills, more than two hours from Manhattan" [ Click ]

    * * *

    Other at NYPost who have received gifts, suggesting the FBI may be interested in other personnel:

    Richard Johnson, have accepted gifts and perks from column subjects and businesses. Including: Johnson's bachelor party [ Punta Mita, Mexico] hosted by "Girls Gone Wild" producer Joe Francis; trip to the Academy Awards paid for by ABC and Mercedes-Benz

    The issue is: Who else at the NY Post is willing to "cut a deal" with the US Attorney first in order to stay out of jail?

    Who knows, Jared -- maybe one of them tipped off Burkle and the FBI actually knows alot.

    Did you happen to catch a glimpse of what the stupid FBI agents do? They sometimes have a problem following procedures in Guantanamo, Black sites, Abu Ghraib, and "other places" where people like to smile. It would be really a shame if the Office of Professional Responsibility "just happened" to miss their annual review at the DoJ Office in NY.

    Did you hear that before Sept 2001, the FBI knew that the aircraft were going to hit the buildings, but -- according the informants inside the FBI -- the "buildings were supposed to fall down"? Wow, do you think that the FBI might know something, but not tell your attorney? No, the FBI isn't smart enough. They would never think to ask for a National Security Letter, they always follow procedures, and they would never walk into an office with their guns showing. They would never think of doing that.

    * * *

    The 2003 case in re inappropriate gifts is most telling in light of the current allegations.

    Legal Analysis

    Attorney: Joe Tacopina, University of Bridgeport School of Law in 1991

    Expertise: Adverse, 775 N.Y.S.2d 827 -- bribery, gratuity


    761 N.Y.S.2d 459 -- Expert testimony self-certified, inadmissible

    679 N.Y.S.2d 828 -- Evidence suppression; jury cured with correction

    587 N.Y.S.2d 702 -- prosecutor misconduct harmless

    801 N.Y.S.2d 415 -- Litigation Strategy: Redefine legis. intent; deny fair trial; key element not proven

    Appropriate Procedures: Other steps in re audit and internal controls; consistent pattern of critical steps not taken, and potential liability on NYPost in light of other conduct

    791 N.Y.S.2d 522 -- Argument in re time to file in re retirement; faulty: circular, adverse assumption

    683 N.Y.S.2d 79 -- Client refused to intervene when should have; termination of officer affirmed; litigation: what others "heard" and credibility issues of client

    Admissible Statements: Indications of failing to apply previous case lessons to instant case

    283 A.D.2d 323 -- Client refused to remain silent; conviction affirmed

    Changes lawyers after fatal admission: Former counsel fatally admitted that client had made a "mistake". This is an admission that the client did not comply with some sort of standard; or has not done what should have been done. CLick [ Click ] New Lawyer [HatTip: PlasticMoonRain ]

    * * *

    Head for the Hills
    Shyama Patel
    August 4, 2003 issue of New York Magazine


    Catskills Home Description

    Take Jared Paul Stern. On a rainy summer Friday, the Post’s “Nightcrawler” is not working the phones or trying to figure out what he’s wearing to the evening’s shindig at Soho House. As is his new norm, Stern is at home in Greene County, where his girlfriend, Ruth Gutman, is teaching him the joys of making brownies from a box. Though “we can’t do plumbing,” says Stern, in the year since they closed on their three-bedroom cottage they’ve learned to do just about everything else. They’ve built bookcases, upholstered furniture, rewired vintage chandeliers, and painted the dining room to match an orange Hermès shopping bag. Around the house, there are photographs of the years the couple spent renting, testing the waters from the South Shore of Long Island to New Canaan, Connecticut. “We loved Bellport,” says Ruth. “But it was too expensive.”

    They finally bought in Oak Hill, paying about $200,000 for four acres and a 2,500-square-foot fixer-upper. It’s a place where the most exciting group to join is the 12 Tribes, a local hippie cult. Which is not to say there’s nothing to do here: Stern has been known to head into town to pick up vintage postcards or take in some donkey basketball. “It’s the Catskills version of Bridgehampton Polo,” he says. “But a lot more entertaining—it’s not just about swilling champagne and kissing up to Jason Binn.”

    * * *

    Employment: New York Post

    Name: Jared Paul Stern

    IP Information

    Discuss this link: [Click ] The address is 138 miles from the Avenue of the Americas, where the NY Post is located; or 22 miles from the Amatrac train station.

    Map of this location.

  • Who the his neighbors

  • What kind of facility is this

  • How long has Jared been associated with this address


    You were very stupid to publicly release this address; and then allow your wife's name to be linked with this address above. This is a match.

    Public Release of Oak Hill Address

    Domain Name..........
    Creation Date........ 2005-02-20
    Registration Date.... 2005-02-20
    Expiry Date.......... 2008-02-20
    Organisation Name.... Jared Paul Stern
    Organisation Address. 8284 Rt. 81
    Organisation Address.
    Organisation Address. Oak Hill
    Organisation Address. 12460
    Organisation Address. NY
    Organisation Address. UNITED STATES

    Admin Name........... Jared Paul Stern
    Admin Address........ 8284 Rt. 81
    Admin Address........
    Admin Address........ Oak Hill
    Admin Address........ 12460
    Admin Address........ NY
    Admin Address........ UNITED STATES
    Admin Email.......... **************
    Admin Phone.......... +1.5182396565
    Admin Fax............

    Tech Name............ YahooDomains TechContact
    Tech Address......... 701 First Ave.
    Tech Address.........
    Tech Address......... Sunnyvale
    Tech Address......... 94089
    Tech Address......... CA
    Tech Address......... UNITED STATES
    Tech Email........... ***********@YAHOO-INC.COM
    Tech Phone........... +1.6198813096
    Tech Fax.............
    Name Server..........
    Name Server..........

    * * *

    Domain Name..........
    Creation Date........ 2004-10-03
    Registration Date.... 2004-10-03
    Expiry Date.......... 2006-10-03
    Organisation Name.... Jared Paul Stern
    Organisation Address. 8284 Rt. 81
    Organisation Address.
    Organisation Address. Oak Hill
    Organisation Address. 12460
    Organisation Address. NY
    Organisation Address. UNITED STATES

    Admin Name........... Jared Paul Stern
    Admin Address........ 8284 Rt. 81
    Admin Address........
    Admin Address........ Oak Hill
    Admin Address........ 12460
    Admin Address........ NY
    Admin Address........ UNITED STATES
    Admin Email.......... *********
    Admin Phone.......... +1.5182396565
    Admin Fax............

    Tech Name............ YahooDomains TechContact
    Tech Address......... 701 First Ave.
    Tech Address.........
    Tech Address......... Sunnyvale
    Tech Address......... 94089
    Tech Address......... CA
    Tech Address......... UNITED STATES
    Tech Email........... ***********@YAHOO-INC.COM
    Tech Phone........... +1.6198813096
    Tech Fax.............
    Name Server..........
    Name Server..........

    Original: Admin Email.......... **************

    Email: changed to *********

    * * *

    Jared & Ruth Stern
    8284 State Route 81
    Oak Hill, NY 12460-5312
    (518) 239-6565

    [ Neighbors ]

    Former Residences: Southshore, Long Island; New Canaan CT; Bellport [ Previous addresses ]

    Did Jared have another name, have a PO Box in Maryland, and was he a student via correspondence with SIU; or is this someone else?

    Jared Paul Smith, 1
    4312 Main St PO Box 26
    Rohrersville, Maryland Click

    Confirm different person: [ Click ]

    * * *

    If anyone else has any information about possible criminal activity, all you have to do is contact this address: [ Click ]

    We're not saying that the FBI is or is not doing and investigation; nor are we saying that this site is endorsed by the US Attorney's office or any law enforcement entity; nor are we saying that the US Attorney is or is not doing anything on this case.

    It's all a mystery, kind of like Jared's "flow of funds" and "where the money really went."

    If you may think that at any time you have been threatened by Jared or anyone in the media to do something that you really didn't want to do, there may be others who can assist you in taking your information. Remember, you may or may not hear anything back.

    Speak out. You are not alone. You do not have to live in fear. Rather, you may feel better talking about what has happened, and letting others know what you suspect.

    There's no reason for you to have a restless sleep. America wants to know the truth.

    Is Jared a criminal, or is he just stupid: Orange in your living room -- what were you thinking?!?!

    If Hanna had a vote, do you think she'd really vote for Orange?

    [ Tipping the 8-ball]

    [8-ball says]: Not likely.

    Ruth, very sorry you’re having to go through this. Happy Easter.

    * * *

    Issue: Does he read the books he reviews? – Look at this title:

    Jared Paul Stern reviews book How To Lose Friends & Alienate People [Toby Young] [[WALL STREET JOURNAL July 2, 2002]

    Martin D. Singer: Burkle attorney


    1. Funds allegedly transferred -- allegedly denied -- in re

    A. Harvey Weinstein, co-founder of Miramax films, [Verify any relatinship to Paula Weistein mentioned in JPS's "Can a Star of Walk Be a Star Who Talks?" NYT March 14, 1999.]

    B. Ronald O. Perelman, the chairman of Revlon Inc.,

    2. JPS admits to providing alcohol to an underage youth, someone he knew was underage. [Freely written, fatal, archived admission: Click ] [Mr. Chow restauraunt, Zac Posen event] [ Click ]

    3. 1995: JPS allegedly fabricates story related to death of Leigh Zermuhlen [ Click ]

    * * *

    Oher funds transfers

    Johnson of PAGE SIX received:
    - free trip to the Academy Awards [ ABC, Mercedes-Benz]
    - first-class airfare
    - three-night stay at the Four Seasons Hotel
    - Mercedes-Benz also provided Johnson a car/driver throughout the weekend, a spokesman for Mercedes-Benz, reportedly Geoff Day, confirmed to the NYT.
    - 4 miles to and from hotel/Academy Awards at the Kodak Theater Seating: [ Click ] 6801 Hollywood Blvd., Hollywood, CA 90028]

    * * *

    Concern: Finding no Corporate information w/NY State [Click ] Has Jared had the opportunity to submit his information online?

    No matching information for either Ruth or Jared available from FEC [Click ]

    Skull & Bones LTD: [ Click ]

    Initial DOS Filing Date: APRIL 01, 2005
    County: NEW YORK
    Jurisdiction: NEW YORK
    Current Entity Status: ACTIVE

    Selected Entity Address Information DOS Process (Address to which DOS will mail process if accepted on behalf of the entity)
    SUITE 1310
    277 BROADWAY
    NEW YORK, NEW YORK, 10007

    The only public intersection between DOWD & MAROTTA goes through Maryland.

    The other view: Did Ray Dowd provide legal services to Jared in exchange for favorable press coverage in the Post: [ Click ]

    Confirmed: Jared and Dowd appear to be linked through Zampolli [ Click ]

    Raymond J. Dowd . . . legal exploits have been featured in such publications as Vanity Fair, Photo District News, American Lawyer, the New York Times, the New York Law Journal, the New York Observer, the New York Post

    Dowd is the "chairman of the Media Law Committee of the New York County", is this perhaps the way that Jared got information on how to "legally" smear people?

    Dowd: Born Brooklyn, New York, December 24, 1964

    Official records: See the 10th Precinct, Det Ficken [ Click ] Lauren Littman listed as prosecuting Click ], but there's no Lauren Littman assigned to the DA's office; or is there any attorney with that name in the lawyer index in public service, they're in private practice but the names do not match. There's a different Lauren, but she's in the NJ US Attorny office, and with a differently spelled name: [Click ]

    10th Precinct contact information: [ Click ]

    What would happen in if the NARUS STA system was being used to provide tips/gossip -- through law enforcement -- to the media, in exchange for silence about the NARUS STA 6400? [Click ]

    * * *

    Sample training: Getting the celebrtity secrets [ Click ]

    Ray Dowd presentation with photos. Names: [Jonathan Tasini, Ray Dowd and George Freeman]

    * * *


    March 14 e-mail from Stern
    March 22: Meeting with Burkle [Tribeca, Manhattan]
    March 31: Second meeting with Burkle
    March 2006: von Richthofen resigns from McAndrews and Forbes
    March 2006: Johnson receives gifts
    April 2006: Johnson in FL for wedding

    Disclosures, ongoing relationship

    Previous postings with Gawker Click ] as mentioned on personal website: [ Click In re Gawker 9/08/2004] [ Going forward from April 2006: Gawker announces future JPS comments Click ]

    Unconfirmed e-mails HatTip The MediaMob


    Notice the To:

    A. The third character goes above the whiteout, suggesting this is an H, as in yahoo;
    B. The kerned protion of the to-block [before the @ sign] has about 11 letters
    C. Notice the "h" in yahoo is lower, than the "l" in aol

    D. We judge the frouth image went to this account:

    E. The other e-mail accounts which are possibilites, but do not meet these criteria [A-C]

    F. Other views: The initial two letters do not match this conclusion, the second letter/and seventh letter both rise above the whiteout, but does not match an "r"; more consistent with the yahoo account.

    G. Conclusion: We are inclined to believe there is an additional e-mail besides the ones listed above.

    * * *

    What does Jared do and Deserve?

    Discussion on his public activity, he comments in others but what does he do: [Click ]

    Discussion on his private life: Jared, does Ruth know about the allegations? [Click ]

    "Donna Tartt's Secret History by Jared Paul Stern for Detour Magazine, May 1999": What Secret History do you have, Jared?

    e-mail: Other e-mail:

    Here are the google files of the old website: [ Click ]Archives, files: [ Click; Archived ]

    * * *

    "In Hollywood, it's not enough that I win. You have to lose," says one studio executive who didn't want be identified discussing a competitor's project. "People are really trying to sabotage each other. It's not a sport anymore. It's a science." [ Click ]