FOIA/PA Fee Waiver Request:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
WASHINGTON, D.C.

___________________________________

Honorable: Rosemary M. Collyer, United States District Judge

Civil Action #12-cv865-RMC.

Dated: March  7th, 2014.

Vincent Michael Marino    
Plaintiff,

v.

 Department of Justice, et al.,
(Assistant United States Attorney: Rhonda Lisa Campbell)
Defendants.
(___________________________________)

PLAINTIFF: MARINO’S MOTION IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS/United States Department of Justice‘s MOTION DENYING MARINO’S REQUEST DOCUMENT 29, FOR A FEE WAIVER AND FOR DEFENDANTS TO CORRECT INACCURATE RECORD DECEMBER 22, 1999 VERDICT SHEET, BY PRECLUDING COUNT 30/ACT-B FROM COUNT ONE AND COUNT TWO, AS COUNT 30/ACT-B WAS DISMISSED BY THE DEFENDANTS/Department of Justice ON SEPT. 28, 1998 (DOCUMENT 581) DURING MARINO’s JURY TRIAL AND THAT MOTION WAS ALLOWED BY THE DISTRICT COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS ON OCT. 22, 1998, (DOCUMENT DATE: OCT. 22, 1998) ALSO DURING MARINO’S JURY TRIAL, THEREAFTER WAS UNLAWFULLY PLACED BACK ON THE DECEMBER 22, 1999 VERDICT SHEET WHICH THE JURY MARKED PROVEN, SERVES AS A SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC INTEREST RESULTING IN MARINO SERVING AN EXTRA 30 YEARS IN PRISON.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Affidavit of Marino, via: Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 56(f)

[1] On _____________________date, Document #___, the Defendants/United States Department of Justice, denied Marino‘s Motion for a Fee Waiver and To Correct the above specifically described inaccurate record, the December 22, 1999 “Verdict Sheet” via: USA v. Marino, CR-97-40009-NMG. (District of Massachusetts/Boston and Worcester), by precluding predicate racketeering Act-B/Count 30 from the verdict sheet as it was dismissed during Marino‘s JURY TRIAL by the Defendants/ Department of Justice on Sept. 28th, 1998 (Document 581) and that motion was allowed by the district court District of Massachusetts on Oct. 22, 1998, also during Marino‘s first JURY TRIAL.

[2]   The following will independently corroborate Specific Operations and Activities of the Government/Defendants/ Department of Justice and that they used PROVEN serial killer TOP ECHELON FBI (PUBLICLY KNOWN) informants: James “Whitey” Bulger , Angelo “Sonny” Mercurio and Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi, set-up the June 16th, 1989, Salemme attempted murder (See United States v. Salemme, 91 F.Supp.2d page 263 (D.Mass.1999), while all three Mercurio, Bulger and Flemmi worked as FBI TOP ECHELON informants.Marino was charged with the June 16th, 1989 Salemme attempted murder, as predicate racketeering Act-A-2 in Count One: RICO and Count Two: RICO conspiracy via: USA v. Marino, CR97-40009-NMG. (D.Mass) On December 22, 1999, Marino was found NOT PROVEN beyond a reasonable doubt of the June 16th, 1989 Salemme attempted murder by a JURY TRIAL.  See December 22, 1999 Verdict Sheet in support. USA v. Marino, CR-97-40009-NMG. (D.Mass).

However, the district court district of Massachusetts, with the urging of the defendants/Department of Justice substantially enhanced Marino‘s sentence an extra 25 years by the mere preponderance of the evidence low standard of proof for the Salemme attempted murder without Due Process of Law violating the 5th Amendment and 6th Amendment’s Jury Trial Right.The above Courts determination was without the knowledge that three Top Echelon FBI informants: Mercurio, Bulger and Flemmi set-up the June 16th, 1989 Salemme attempted murder according to United States v. Salemme, 91 F.Supp.2d 263 (D.Mass.1999).The Defendants/ Department of Justice intentionally withheld this core exculpatory material Brady, Giles and Giglio evidence from the 1997 investigating federal grand jury and Marino‘s 1998 and 1999 JURY TRIALS.Marino has clearly and concededly specifically identified operations or activity of the government which is the subject in question and shown how the content of those records relates to such an operation or activity.

For example, the Department of Justice and its components FBI have a super secret program called: “TOP ECHELON INFORMANT PROGRAM” which recruits top level criminals in the policy making positions of a criminal organized syndicates and or gangs which three criteria’s have to be met before a criminals such as James “Whitey” Bulger, Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi, Angelo “Sonny” Mercurio and Mark Rossetti, (1) has to be and are at the top level of any criminal organization, (2) be an accomplished serial killer and (3) be in the position to make policies concerning the criminal organization.Bulger, Flemmi, Mercurio and Mark Rossetti and now Salemme meet that criteria and are all directly and indirectly involved in Marino‘s case as Marino was charges with trying to kill both Salemme Sr., and Mark Rossetti, et al., according to indictment USA v. Marino, CR-97-40009-NMG. District of Massachusetts/Boston/Worcester).Mercurio with the assistance of Bulger and Flemmi set-up the June 16th, 1989 Salemme attempted murder while all three worked as “TOP ECHELON” FBI/Department of Justice informants. According to United States v. Salemme, 91 F.Supp.2d 263 (D.Mass.1999).

[3] Plaintiff: Marino respectfully requests “A FEE WAIVER and Order the Department of Justice and its components to Correct the December 22, 1999, VERDICT SHEET, via: USA v. Marino, CR-97-40009-NMG. (D.Mass), by precluding predicate racketeering Act-B/Count 30 cocaine conspiracy from Count One: RICO and Count Two: RICO conspiracy.”Because both Count 30/Act-B cocaine conspiracy was DISMISSED by the defendants/ Department of Justice during Marino‘s JURY TRIAL against Marino on Sept. 28, 29, 1998 (Document 581) Indictment page 14 and 69 showing both Count 30/Act-B are the very same charge etc.And that motion by the Department of Justice was allowed by the District Court District of Massachusetts on October 22, 1998 (Document date:: Oct. 22, 1998) also during Marino‘s JURY TRIAL.Marino’s request for correction of the Public Record is according tom the PRIVACY ACT TITLE 5 U.S.C. Section 552a(d)(1)-(3).The Privacy Act “safeguards the Public from unwarranted collection, maintenance, use and dissemination of personal information contained in agency (Defendants/Department of Justice‘s) records by allowing an individual to participate in ensuring his (Plaintiff: Marino‘s December 22, 1999 VERDICT SHEET #CR-97-40009-NMG. (D.Mass)), are accurate and properly used.”

In Marino the defendant’s/ Department of Justice‘s inaccurate VERDICT SHEET of December 22, 1999, supra was used improperly to convict Marino of Count One: RICO and receive 20 extra years to serve in prison and to improperly used to convict Marino of Count Two: RICO conspiracy and receive an extra 10 years to serve in prison for a total of 30 years extra to serve in prison, in violations of the PRIVACY ACT.See Henke v. Dep’t of Commerce, 83 F.3d 1453, 1456 (D.C.Cir.1996) internal quotations and citations omitted).

“To that end, the Act requires any agency (Defendants/ Department of Justice) which maintains a ‘system of records’ to publish at least annually a statement in the Federal Register describing that system.” Id.; 5 U.S.C. Section 552a(e)(4).The Privacy Act ensures that an individual (Marino) can access his records and request amendment of those records to correct any inaccuracies (See Marino supra. Title 5 U.S.C. Section 552a(d)(1)-(3).A civil action (Marino v. Department of Justice, et al., civil action #12-cv-865-RMC. (District of Columbia)), is available to correct an inaccurate record that an agency (Defendants/Department of Justice in Marino, supra) has refused to amend or an individual request which an agency has not complied. Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. Section 552a(g)(1)(A)-(B). While the Privacy Act generally permits the correction of facts, it does not allow for the “correction of opinions of facts, it does not allow for the “correction of opinions or judgments.” McCready v. Nicholson, 465 F.3d 1, 19 (D.C.Cir.2006).

[4] For the Record, the above inaccuracies record by the defendants/ Department of Justice, intentionally caused Marino to be held over 13 years over his term of imprisonment without due process of law, with the correction of the above specific record Marino should has been released from prison in the year 2000, this clearly serves as a “Significant public interest” especially when the defendant/ Department of Justice knew and never corrected the inaccurate records specifically described supra.And even now in this instant civil action the defendants/ Department of Justice and its components intentionally sidestepped the issue and once again ignored it.Marino has been incarcerated since December 15, 1996, and served over 17 years on a maximum 4 year sentence with already good time jail credits earned.This also serves as a “Substantial Public Interest.”

[5] Marino requests a Fee Waiver of $5,796.00, for Defendants 207-Hour Search for Documents that may lead to Marino‘s Actual Innocence of the June 16th, 1989 Salemme attempted murder.As predicate racketeering Act A-2 in Count One: RICO Marino received an extra 20 years to serve in prison, and Count Two: RICO conspiracy, Marino received an additional 10 years to serve in prison, for a total of 30 extra years to serve extra in prison violates Due Process of the Fifth Amendment and Sixth Amendment’s Jury Trial Right also serving as a “Significant Public Interest” requires a Fee Waiver” As the Documents May also lead to egregious governmental/Defendants/Department of Justice‘s intentional misconduct.

As The Public Records and Under Seal Records supports: Example see United States v. Salemme, 91 F.Supp.2d 261-311 (exhibits: 188-246) in part under seal (D.Mass.1999), shows that Angelo “Sonny”Mercurio with the assistance of James “Whitey” Bulger and Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi set-up the June 16th, 1989 Salemme attempted murder, while all three were working as “TOP ECHELON” FBI/ Department of Justice informants. See Salemme, 91 F.Supp.2d 263 (D.Mass.1999).

Mercurio, Bulger and Flemmi worked for FBI agents: Connolly (convicted of murder in State of Florida and being part of the Salemme , Bulger and Flemmi criminal organization, see USA v. Connolly, 341 F.3d 16-29 (1st Cir.2003) and agents: Michael J. Buckley (fraudulently testified against Marino in front of the 1997 investigating federal grand jury and 1998 and 1999 JURY TRIALS of Marino , long after he received cash payoffs from Marino‘s enemies: Bulger, Flemmi and Salemme.

See State of Florida v. Connolly, (FBI agent), #__(Miami, Florida Sept. 22, 2008’s testimony of government’s star witness: Flemmi, stating he and Bulger made cash payoffs to FBI agents: Buckley and Connolly in the 1980s through the 1990s with criminal profits to protect their organization from its enemies (Marino and Ponzo, among others) and law enforcement investigations according to the PUBLIC RECORDS.See USA v. Marino, CR-97-40009-NMG. (D.Mass).

[6] The government/defendants/ Department of Justice‘s witness’s John “Smiley” Mele and Augustus “Gus” Laface’s audio FBI tapes file #281B-BS-65373, showing two unknown FBI informants secretly audio tape recorded Mele and Laface conspiring to murder Salemme Sr and Salemme Jr., in June and July 1989 with fully automatic AK-47’s weapons equipped with silencers.The above tapes were intentionally concealed from the 1997 investigating federal grand jury, from the 1998 and 1999 JURY TRIAL of Marino also serves as a “Significant Public Interest.”

As the above tapes refutes the governments/Department of Justice‘s only identification witness Mele‘s testimony concerning the June 16th, 1989 Salemme attempted murder which charges Marino and Ponzo, by the very same defendants/ Department of Justice cited in Marino‘s civil action: Marino v. Department of Justice, et al., 12-cv-865-RMC. (District of Columbia) PENDING.The above exculpatory material Brady, Giles and Giglio material evidence is in contrary to Mele’s 1998 and 1999 sworn testimony against Marino  at Marino‘s JURY TRIALS.See Fee Waiver  Department of Justice regulations at 28 CFR Section 16.11(k)(2012).

[7] Marino‘s request for a fee waiver has demonstrated that disclosure of the above specifically stated information is in the PUBLIC INTEREST because it is likely to contribute significantly to PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF THE OPERATIONS AND ACTIVITIES OF THE/ Department of Justice and is not primarily in the commercial interest of the Requester. 5 USC Section 552 (a)(4)(A)(iii).

[8] Marino had clearly and concededly met ALL SIX FACTORS set forth in 28 CFR Section 16.11(k).The first of there factors concerns the “PUBLIC INTEREST” requirement; the Fifth and Sixth Factors concerns whether Marino‘s interest in the above records is primarily commercial.

[9] The above specifically described records disclosure will “likely contribute” to an understanding of specific governmental/Defendants/ Department of Justice‘s operations or activities (FBI/ Department of Justice‘s TOP ECHELON Informant program which the informants has to be a leader or organizer of a criminal organization in the policy making position and an accomplished professional serial killers such as: Frank “Cadillac Frank” Salemme; James “Whitey” Bulger; Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi; Mark Rossetti; Angelo “Sonny” MercurioJohn “Smiley the Butcher” Mele; Augustus “Gus” Laface just to name a few) all directly involved with the Marino case, under FACTOR TWO.

The disclosable information supra, is clearly meaningfully informative in relation to the subject matter of the (Marino‘s FOIA/PA request for documents. See, e.g., Klein v. Toupin, No. 05-647, 2006 U.S. Distr. LEXIS 32478, at *11-12 (D.D.C.May 24, 2006)reiterating that Trouping and unsupportive assertions of misconduct are not “meaningfully informative” of government operations). In Marino, supra, his clear assertions are independently corroborated with the PUBLIC RECORDS as seen in United States v. Salemme, 91 F.Supp.2d 261-311 (exhibits: 188-246) (D.Mass.1999); United States v. Connolly, (FBI agent), 341 F.3d 16-29 (1st Cir.2003); State of Florida v. Connolly (FBI agent), #____(Miami, Florida, Sept. 22, 2008’s testimony of government’s star and highly credible witness: Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi stating he and Bulger made cash payoffs to FBI agents: Michael J. Buckley, John J. Connolly Jr., et al., to protect their (Flemmi, Bulger and Salemme‘s) criminal organization from its enemies and law enforcement.

Also see concealed Mele tapes, which with Mele‘s valid consent he conducted a Declaration/Debriefing with officer of the Court James E. Costello, attorney at law whom consensually video and audio recorded Mele stating that he Mele was in fear of his life concerning that Salemme Sr., and Salemme Jr., and might try kill him and Augustus “Gus” Laface, attempted to extort them and robbed them.Attorney Costello, admitted the above to Marino, in front of witnesses; Mele admitted this to Marino in front of witnesses; and Frank Salemme Jr., admitted this event in front of witnesses, to Marino.Now Costello, improperly states it did not happen, because Costello is in business both legal and illegal with Mele, Laface, Mark Rossetti (another TOP ECHELON FBI informant suspect in 20 murders while a protected FBI informant for FBI agent Buckley, the same Buckley whom prosecuted Marino by fraudulently testifying in front of the Federal Grand Jury in 1997 and 1998 and 1999 JURY TRIAL of Marino).

In Marino, his assertions are independently corroborated with the Public Records as seen in Salemme, 91 F.Supp.2d 261-311, exhibits: 188-246 (D.Mass.1999); United States v. Connolly, (FBI agent), 341 F.3d 16-29 (1st Cir.2003); State of Florida v. Connolly (FBI agent), #___(Miami, Florida, Sept. 22, 2008); agent Connolly convicted of murder.

Defendants/Department of Justice‘s deemed highly credible witness: Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi‘s testimony on Sept. 22, 2008, stating he and Bulger made cash payoffs to FBI agents: Michael J. Buckley and John J. Connolly, Jr., with criminal profits for the agents to protect Salemme, Flemmi and Bulger‘s criminal organization from its enemies (according to the Department of Justice /Defendants: Marino and Ponzo) and from law enforcement investigations.

Also see concealed Mele/James E. Costello tapes, generated in 1988 or 1989, which Mele requested that attorney Costello, conduct a deposition/declaration of Mele with Mele‘s valid consent to be audio and video recorded, which Mele swears under oath that Frank Salemme Sr., and Frank Salemme Jr., were actively both historically and currently trying to assassinate him (Mele and Laface), tried to extort them and that Mele and Laface’s life was in danger. Costello, admitted this event to Marino, in front of witnesses; Mele, admitted this event to Marino in front of witnesses; and the TARGET: Frank Salemme Jr., admitted this to Marino, also in front of witnesses. NOW Costello takes the unlawful position and denied this ever happened, designed to protect Mele from being charged with perjury, obstruction of justice, and also to protect Costello‘s legal and otherwise financial investments with Mele (on the Witness protection program); Laface, (possesses a get out of jail free card), Mark Rossetti (witness Protection Program member) whom Costello invested with.

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Enlighten Yourself… “Where the willingness is great, the difficulties cannot be great. ” ~Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince

%d bloggers like this: