Newly Discovered Evidence concerning PROJECT MARINO

em_468x60_static

Newly Discovered Evidence concerning PROJECT MARINO, supra which the Government has stipulated on Public Record that they withheld over 200,000 pages from Vincent M. Marino which may be responsive to Marino‘s FOIA/PA Requests concerning specifically:

g12c000000000000000e89e1969e77c982ecd38262ccc8ad33104e9d736(1) The June 16th, 1989 Francis “Cadillac Frank” Salemme attempted murder;

321(2) FBI agents John Connolly Jr and Michael J Buckley payoffs in the 1980s through the 1990s from FBI informants: Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi and James “Whitey” Bulger. according to the government’s star and highly credible PUBLICLY KNOWN Witness Flemmi.Flemmi‘s testimony on September 22, 2008, for the government via: State of Florida v. ( FBI agent) John Connolly Jr‘s jury trial.

Crime Family FeudThe government in an attempt to cover this up dismissed FBI agent Buckley from the Enrico “RICO” Ponzo prosecution case and replaced him with his partner: Todd Richards.

(3) John “Smiley” Mele and Augustus “Gus” Laface’s Four audio tapes which they were audio taped by unknown FBI informants, generated Mele and Laface’s conspiracy to kill both Salemme Sr. and Salemme Jr. in June/July 1989. Mele became a sole government witness concerning the Salemme attempted murder against Marino in 1998 and 1999 RICO trials, which resulted in Marino being FOUND NOT PROVEN BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT of the June 16, 1989 Salemme attempted murder.

  • However the Court (Judge: Nathaniel M. Gorton) with the urging of the government: AUSA: Jefferey Auerhahn and Cynthia Ann Young enhanced Marino‘s sentence an extra 25 years by the mere PREPONDERANCE of the evidence for the June 16, 1989 Salemme attempted murder even though the JURY DID NOT CONVICT MARINO of It.
  • See USA v. Marino, CR-97-40009-NMG. (D.Mass) April 13, 2000 SENTENCING TRANSCRIPTS of Marino, pages 1, 20-24 in support.

sonny mecurioThe government concealed the facts that FBI top echelon PUBLICLY KNOWN informants: Angelo “Sonny” Mercurio (know diseased) with the assistance of James “Whitey” Bulger and Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi called Francis “Cadillac Frank” Salemme to a location outside of Boston on June 16, 1989, to be shot.PROOF SEE: United States v. Salemme, 91 F.Supp.2d page 263 (D.Mass.1999).

Moreover, after the FBI and the United States Department of Justice knew their informants Mercurio, Bulger and Flemmi set up the Salemme attempted murder the above FBI agents and United States Department of Justice officials allowed Angelo “Sonny” Mercurio to flee and become a fugitive. See Salemme, 91 F.Supp.2d 261-311 (D.Mass.1999);

jeffAlso Assistant United States Attorney’s: Auerhahn and Sullivan was allowed in 1989 to review Mercurio‘s  FBI informant file and knew that Mercurio while working as a informant set-up the Salemme attempted murder and still armed with this information seeked to indict Vincent M. Marino and Enrico “RICO” Ponzo for the Salemme attempted murder.

(4) Vincent M. Marino also seeks for the United States Department of Justice to correct the Record (VERDICT SHEET DECEMBER 22, 1999) by precluding predicate racketeering ACT-B from it, as it was dismissed by the government (Document 581, Sept. 28, 1998) and Court (Document Date Oct. 22, 1998) DURING MARINO’s RICO Trial #1 in 1998. This inaccurate record was used to enhance Marino sentence an extra 30 years.

  •     See NEWLY DECIDED CASE: Marino v. Department of Justice, et al., civil action #12-865-RMC. (District of Columbia)November 12 and13, 2013 COURT ORDERS ORDERING the above documents to be handed over to Marino.
  • DOCUMENT 24 Filed 11-12-2013 pages 1-18 MEMORANDUM OPINION    held in relevant part that:

On May 29.2-12, Vincent M. Marino filed a pro-se lawsuit against several agencies within the Department of Justice for allegedly violating the Freedom of Information Act. Privacy Act, and Sunshine Act.

Currently incarcerated in federal prison (FCI McDowell, P.O. Box 1009 Welch, West Virginia 24801), on racketeering and drug-related convictions, Mr.Marino requests a variety of records that he believes will both exonerate him and show government misconduct.

Specifically. Mr. Marino claims that the records will show that Angelo “Sonny” Mercurio, Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi, and James “Whitey” Bulger set him up with false charges, aided and abetted by rogue federal agents and prosecutors.

The defending federal agencies move to dismiss, or in the alternative for summary judgment. The Court finds that the motion largely is premature. While Mr. Marino‘s Sunshine Act claim is facially frivolous, his other causes of action are not so clearly without merit.Some agencies did not conduct any search for responsive records while others performed searches only partially responsive to Mr. Marino‘s requests.

Unable to find that the defending federal agencies conducted adequate searches, reasonably calculated to identify responsive records, the Court will DENY without prejudice the motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, motion for summary judgment.

I. FACTS

A. Background

Mr. Marino is imprisoned at Federal Correctional Institution (FCI) McDowell in West Virginia, Compl. [Dkt.1] at 2, after convictions for racketeering, conspiracy to murder in aid of racketeering, and drug possession in the District Court for the District of Massachusetts, see United States v. Marino’s, 277 F.3d 11 (1st Cir.2002); Mot. to Dismiss or Summ.J. [Dkt.14] at 2-3.

A repeat litigators, See Marino v. CIA, et al., No. 11-813, 2012 WL 4482986 (D.D.C. Sept.28,2012), aff’d, 12-5325 (D.C.Cir.Oct.21,2013) (Per Curiam).

1242Mr. Marino now sues several components of United States Department of Justice (collectively, Defendants) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. Section 552, Privacy Act of 1974, id Section 552a, and Sunshine Act, id. Section 552b.

Specifically, Mr. Marino names: the Office of the Attorney General (OAG);

  • the Executive Office of the United States Attorneys (EOUSA);
  • the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI);
  • the Office of Enforcement Operations (OEO);
  • the Office of Information and Policy (OIP);
  • the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia (USAO-DC);
  • the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts (USAO-MA).Compl. at 2.

Mr. Marino seeks records that allegedly demonstrate his actual and legal innocence of the “SALEMME ATTEMPTED MURDER,” racketeering convictions, and drug convictions, including records from meetings allegedly held by Assistant U.S. Attorneys (AUSAs) to achieve a “potential out of court settlement” that “facilitated FRAUD upon the Federal grand Jury.” Id. at 3-4.

Mr. Marino claims that these records show “egregious governmental misconduct, due process violations… governmental impediments,” and violations of his right to exculpatory evidence under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). Id. at 3.Marino‘s FOIA/PA requests any and all records, documents, memoranda, statements, reports, and other information or data in whatever form, maintained by your agency that relates to and/or makes reference to [Mr. Marino], directly or indirectly, more specifically [Mr. Marino]

Marino‘s FOIA/PA Requests to Department of Justice Components: EOUSA, USAO/D.Mass, FBI, CRIM, OEO, OIP, OAG, USAO/D.C.:

Courter Decl., Ex.1 [Dkt. 14-4] at 1.

Also see synopsis of the above Memorandum Opinion DOCUMENT 24 Filed 11-12-2013 pages 1-18 Marino v. Department of Justice, et al., civil action #12-cv-865-RMC. (District of Columbia);

Page 6:  The letter dated July 6, 2011, and one of the letters dated July 12, 2011, requested records under FOIA concerning Mr. Marino or his aliases as well as “the December 22, 1999 ‘Verdict Sheet’” from the District Court for the District of Massachusetts criminal matter, Case No. 97-40009. Id., Ex.D [Dkt. 15-1] at 1-2;id., Ex. H [Dkt.15-2] at 1-2.

These letters also asked for certain corrections to the VERDICT SHEET pursuant to the Privacy Act. Id.

Page 7:  Mr. Marino answered on July 24, 2012, with a list of : specific pages and exhibits from Salemme  ; citations to other decisions, including his own cases; and a file number for four FBI tapes from 1989 concerning the SALEMME ATTEMPTED MURDER. Def’s.’ Statement of Facts Paragraph 47; Brandon Decl., Ex. L [Dkt.15-3] at 2.

  • Mr. Marino told EOUSA that he was “willing to pay all costs up to $1000.00 to receive” the records he had requested. Ex.L at 2.

EOUSA then directed USAO-MA to search for records responsive to Mr. Marino‘s requests. Admittedly confused by the scope of Mr.Marino ‘s requests, USAO-MA, with the assistance of the AUSA (Cynthia Ann Young, Chief of the Criminal Division of New England) who had prosecuted Mr. Marino, conducted a search for responsive records.An approximately two-hour search yielded three file cabinets, thirty-five boxes, and approximately 72,000 electronic files containing potentially responsive records. Defs.’ Statements of Facts Paragraphs 48-51; Brandon Decl. Paragraphs 12-14.EOUSA wrote again to Mr. Marino‘s on November 20, 2012, updating him on its search. EOUSA reported the volume of records that its initial search had uncovered, and estimated that completing the search would require approximately 320 hours.Based on a search time fee of twenty-eight dollars per hour, EOUSA estimated the total cost of the search to be $8,960.00

It asked Mr. Marino‘s to remit a check or money order for this amount, narrow his request, or specify the amount he was willing to pay (in which case EOUSA would only process records up to that amount). Def’s Statement of Facts Paragraphs 51-52; Brandon Decl., Ex. m [Dkt 15-3] at 1.

On December 17, 2012, EOUSA received a request from Mr. Marino‘s for a FEE WAIVER. Defs’ Statement of Facts paragraph 53.

  • Mr. Marino asserted that the records would show “egregious governmental misconduct, due process violations [and] [would] serve as a substantial public interest.” Brandon Decl., Ex.N [Dkt.15-3] at 10.

On January 17, 2013, and February 10, 2013, Mr.Marino appealed the denial of his WAIVER request. Brandon Decl., Ex.P [Dkt.15-4]; id., ExR [15-4].He sent one letter directly to OIP, the Department of Justice component that handles FOIA administrative appeals, see 28 CFR Section 16.9(a), and another to EOUSA, which forwarded it to OIP, Defs’ Statements of Facts paragraph 57; Brand Decl. paragraph 20. The records is unclear as to the outcome of Mr. Marino‘s appeals.