Systemic Corruption Examples At Its Worst
The Who's Who Worldwide Registry Tragedy

Click for Sampling of Members - WoW!!     What a list!       Strictly Politics      Judge?      Incredible list of alleged victims

Tiny sampling of Managing Directors     Cross Benjamin    Cross Springer     Direct Quote         Con THESE People?!!

Million-dollar con man testifying to stay out of prison        America's Best & Brightest       Main Page       Dirty Jury?

                                                          Masters and Millionaires

5413

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X
3 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : CR 96 1016(S-1)
4 v. : U.S. Courthouse
5 Uniondale, New York BRUCE W. GORDON, WHO'S WHO
6 WORLD WIDE REGISTRY, INC., : STERLING WHO'S WHO, INC.,
7 TARA GARBOSKI, ORAL FRANK : OSMAN, LAURA WEITZ, ANNETTE
8 HALEY, SCOTT MICHAELSON, : and MARTIN
9 REFFSIN, :    TRANSCRIPT OF TRIAL
10 Defendants. :February 24, 1998
11 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X 9:45 o'clock a.m.

12 BEFORE:

13 HONORABLE ARTHUR D. SPATT, U.S.D.J. and a jury
14 APPEARANCES:
15 For the Government: ZACHARY W. CARTER
16 United States Attorney One Pierrepont Plaza
17 Brooklyn, New York 11201
By: RONALD G. WHITE, ESQ.
18 CECIL SCOTT, ESQ. Assistant U.S. Attorneys
19 For the Defendants: NORMAN TRABULUS, ESQ.
20 For Bruce W. Gordon
170 Old Country Road, Suite 600
21 Mineola, New York 11501

22 EDWARD P. JENKS, ESQ.
For Who's Who Worldwide
23 Registry, Inc. and
Sterling Who's, Who, Inc.
24 332 Willis Avenue
Mineola, New York 11501
25
(cont'd)


HARRY RAPAPORT, CSR, CP, CM OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

5414

1 APPEARANCES (cont'd):

2 GARY SCHOER, ESQ. For Tara Garboski
3 6800 Jericho Turnpike
Syosset, New York 11791
4
ALAN M. NELSON, ESQ.
5 For Oral Frank Osman
3000 Marcus Avenue
6 Lake Success, New York 11042

7 WINSTON LEE, ESQ.
For Laura Weitz
8 319 Broadway
New York, New York 10007
9
MARTIN GEDULDIG, ESQ.
10 For Annette Haley
400 South Oyster Bay Road
11 Hicksville, New York 11801

12 JAMES C. NEVILLE, ESQ.
For Scott Michaelson
13 225 Broadway
New York, New York 10007
14
THOMAS F.X. DUNN, ESQ.
15 For Mr Shortcut,
150 Nassau Street
16 New York, New York 10038

17 JOHN S. WALLENSTEIN, ESQ.
For Martin Reffsin 18 215 Hilton Avenue
Hempstead, New York 11551
19

20 Court Reporter: HARRY RAPAPORT, CSR
United States District Court
21 Two Uniondale Avenue
Uniondale, New York 11553
22 (516) 485-6558

23
Proceedings recorded by mechanical stenography, transcript
24 produced by Computer-Assisted Transcription
25

HARRY RAPAPORT, CSR, CP, CM OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

5415

1 M O R N I N G S E S S I O N

2

3 (Whereupon, the following takes place in the

4 absence of the jury.)

5 THE COURT: Where is your witness?

6 MS. SCOTT: Right next door.

7 THE COURT: Bring him in.

8 MR. LEE: I have a preliminary application.

9 THE COURT: Why did you wait for now?

10 MR. LEE: Only thing I wanted to do is to let

11 Mr. Rapaport know I needed one minute with the Court, and

12 I thought that was done. I assume you were notified. I

13 apologize.

14 THE COURT: A miscommunication. It is all

15 right.

16 MR. LEE: I am asking permission to bring into

17 the courtroom my personal cassette player. The reason

18 being is when I review the tapes, I had queued portions of

19 it to my own counter, which is different from the counter

20 in court.

21 THE COURT: What is a cassette player? The thing

22 that plays these tapes?

23 MR. LEE: Yes. Mine has a counter, which I don't
24 believe queues out to exactly what the government has.
25 THE COURT: Bring it in.

HARRY RAPAPORT, CSR, CP, CM OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

5416

1 MR. LEE: Thank you.

2 The second application, with respect to the

3 testimony of Mr. Safer, I am requesting a direction to

4 your Honor for the government to instruct Mr. Safer not to

5 mention the prior employment of my client, Ms. Weitz, as

6 Steven Watstein's Who's Who's organization. He was also a

7 prior employee.

8 We discussed it in the context of an in limine

9 motion. And I believe the government did say that they

10 will not bring it up in their direct. But, of course, I

11 wanted to make sure to remind everyone so it doesn't get

12 blurted out.

13 THE COURT: Is Mr. Safer the next witness?

14 MR. WHITE: No. We have Mr. West --

15 THE COURT: Please advise him not to say anything

16 about that other employment.

17 MR. SCHOER: I join in that application with

18 respect to my client. I originally made the motion.

19 THE COURT: She also worked for Mr. West?

20 MR. SCHOER: Yes.

21 MR. WHITE: We didn't intend to elicit that.

22 THE COURT: Just mention it to him.

23 MR. WHITE: I will.
24 THE COURT: By the way, don't bring up that he
25 talked to the lawyer about the case. In other words, in

HARRY RAPAPORT, CSR, CP, CM OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

5417

1 cross-examination, don't say, well, did you discuss this

2 case -- you can say it. But if you do, he might come out

3 with something, he told me not to say something. So just

4 watch it.

5 Did I make myself clear? I don't think so.

6 MR. SCHOER: Yes, you did.

7 THE COURT: All right, let's go.

8 (Whereupon, the jury at this time entered the

9 courtroom.)

10 THE COURT: Good morning, members of the jury.

11 Please be seated.

12 I have to say that you made a valiant effort to

13 be here. It didn't really come off too well, but you made

14 a valiant effort. So I am thankful for that.

15 However, we delayed you a little while even after

16 you delayed a little bit. So it is even.

17 We will call it a draw.

18 You may proceed.

19 Where are we, Mr. White?

20 MR. WHITE: I began my redirect on Friday to

21 Mr. Watstein -- of Mr. Watstein.

22 THE COURT: Mr. Watstein you are still -- you

23 better readminister the oath again. I don't know how long
24 it was. When did you start testifying?
25 THE WITNESS: Tuesday, Monday?

HARRY RAPAPORT, CSR, CP, CM OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

5418

1 THE COURT: Administer the oath again then.

2

3 S T E V E N W A T S T E I N,

4 called as a witness, having been previously

5 duly sworn, was examined and testified as

6 follows:

7

8 THE CLERK: Please be seated.

9 State your full name for the record.

10 THE WITNESS: Steven Watstein, W A T S T E I N.

11 THE COURT: You mayor proceed, Mr. White.

12

13 REDIRECT EXAMINATION (cont'd)

14 BY MR. WHITE:

15 Q Mr. Watstein, let me give you Exhibit 1379, the

16 transcript of your January 1993 meeting with Mr. Martin at

17 the Garden City Hotel.

18 Now, do you recall you were asked questions by

19 Mr. Nelson about various portions of this tape recording?

20 A In a general sense, yes.

21 Q Now, is it correct that ads were placed in

22 newspapers, and that's what Mr. Martin was responding to

23 for this job interview?
24 A Yes, sir.
25 Q Now, you recall Mr. Nelson asked you at that time as

HARRY RAPAPORT, CSR, CP, CM OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

5419
Watstein-redirect/White


1 to whether your arrest was public knowledge?

2 A Yes, sir.

3 Q And was it at that time?

4 A Yes, sir.

5 Q And since it was last week, I wanted to be accurate

6 and go over one or two questions Mr. Nelson asked you.

7 Mr. Nelson asked you: Would I be correct that a

8 lot of people in the industry knew that you were arrested

9 and were in trouble for running your business

10 fraudulently?

11 Answer: That is correct.

12 MR. WHITE: I am reading from 4717 of the trial

13 transcript:

14 Question by Mr. Nelson. Certainly it appears

15 that Frank Martin was aware of this; is that right?

16 And the answer was: Yes, sir.

17 Q So, notwithstanding that Mr. Martin was aware that

18 you had been arrested, he wanted to work for you; is that

19 right?

20 A Yes, sir.

21 Q Now, if you can turn to page 6 of the transcript.

22 Now, if you look at the second portion that is

23 attributed to Mr. Martin on that tape --
24 A Yes, sir.
25 Q And if you look where he says, and I will read it,

HARRY RAPAPORT, CSR, CP, CM OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

5420
Watstein-redirect/White


1 although, umm, I, I make it a point that, you know, you

2 can't say anything, that you can't deviate from the

3 presentation. Because, number one, the presentation

4 basically does work. Umm, and, number two, the postal

5 authorities, and all those other bad guys out there, might

6 be listening. So it behooves you to just stay within the

7 framework of the presentation.

8 Do you see that, Mr. West?

9 A Yes, sir.

10 Q And what was your understanding as to Mr. Martin was

11 referring to as the postal authorities and all those other

12 bad guys out there?

13 MR. NELSON: Objection.

14 THE COURT: Sustained.

15 Q Now, do you recall in connection with that passage

16 Mr. Nelson asked you, isn't it true that Mr. Martin

17 wouldn't say stick to the script, if the script was

18 inaccurate, do you recall he asked you that question?

19 A Yes, sir.

20 Q Do you later in the conversation ask Mr. Martin if

21 the script was inaccurate?

22 A Yes, sir.

23 Q And tell us where you do that.
24 A You will have to refresh my memory as to which page,
25 sir?

HARRY RAPAPORT, CSR, CP, CM OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

5421
Watstein-redirect/White


1 Q Well, if you take a look at page -- look at page 9.

2 A Yes, sir.

3 Q What do you ask him about the accuracy of the script?

4 A At a certain point I ask, what -- the, the

5 presentations that I have seen had a lot of puffing in it,

6 a lot of exaggerations in it. What was the typical,

7 where, where, where, where did his presentation --

8 withdraw it inconsistent with reality?

9 Q If you look at the rest of 9 and page 10 and 11, does

10 Mr. Martin tell you where he feels it is inconsistent with

11 reality?

12 A Yes, sir.

13 Q Now, do you recall Mr. Nelson asked you with respect

14 to this tape whether it was true that if the managers at

15 Who's Who Worldwide didn't get a commission, they,

16 therefore, had no incentive to let everyone in; do you

17 remember he asked you that?

18 A Yes, sir.

19 Q Do you ask Mr. Martin in this conversation about the

20 percentage of people who get in?

21 A Yes. I believe that I do.

22 Q Okay.

23 If you can take a look at page 17, what do you
24 ask him?
25 MR. NELSON: Objection to the form of the

HARRY RAPAPORT, CSR, CP, CM OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

5422
Watstein-redirect/White


1 question, to the form. It is by way of a statement and

2 not a question.

3 THE COURT: Overruled.

4 A I say if -- was everybody accepted there if, if, a

5 person breathing would buy a membership. I mean, would --

6 and then Martin responds, umm, only if it was, you know,

7 like if it was something like, umm, umm, a porno shop or

8 something, really.

9 Q And further on down, do you ask him about a specific

10 percentage being accepted?

11 A Yes, sir.

12 Q What do you ask him?

13 A I say, but 99 percent were accepted is what you're

14 saying?

15 And he says, yeah, I would say so. If they got

16 the money. As long as they weren't totally outright, umm,

17 just, you know, sure, yeah, laughs, yeah, laughs, really.

18 Q Okay, now, if you can go back to page 9, and the part

19 you read before, where you ask him, where was the

20 presentation inconsistent with reality, right?

21 A Yes, sir.

22 Q Do you see that?

23 A Yes, sir.
24 Q All right.
25 And a few lines down Mr. Martin says, I suspect

HA RRY RAPAPORT, CSR, CP, CM OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

5423
Watstein-redirect/White


1 the major flaw was telling people that they were

2 recommended by other, other, other members.

3 Do you see that?

4 A Yes, sir.

5 Q Now, did you make Mr. Martin give you that answer?

6 A No, sir.

7 MR. NELSON: Objection.

8 THE COURT: Overruled.

9 Q In that meeting, was there anything preventing

10 Mr. Martin from saying that, no, there was nothing

11 inconsistent with reality?

12 MR. JENKS: Objection.

13 THE COURT: First of all you are interrupting the

14 question again. I thought we were past that stage.

15 MR. NELSON: I apologize. It was one of those

16 types of questions.

17 THE COURT: I know you are a vigorous advocate.

18 You all are. But just wait until the question is over,

19 will you?

20 MR. NELSON: Yes, Judge.

21 THE COURT: Can I hear that?

22 (Whereupon, the court reporter reads the

23 requested material.)
24 THE COURT: What is your objection, it is a
25 simplistic type of question.

HARRY RAPAPORT, CSR, CP, CM OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

5424
Watstein-redirect/White


1 MR. NELSON: Objection to the form of the

2 question. It is a leading question being asked on

3 redirect examination.

4 THE COURT: It is not exactly leading. And so

5 you understand what leading is, and I will say it again.

6 I said it before.

7 There was nothing that prevented you from saying

8 anything other than that, was there?

9 That's a leading question.

10 He says, was there anything that prevented -- let

11 me hear what he said, maybe you are right.

12 MR. WHITE: I think you are right, your Honor.

13 THE COURT: It is reassuring to have your help.

14 Let me hear the question.

15 (Whereupon, the court reporter reads the

16 requested material.)

17 THE COURT: That is not a leading question in my

18 view. Was there anything. That's the difference,

19 overruled.

20 THE WITNESS: No, sir, there was nothing that

21 prevented him.

22 THE COURT: As I said, it is a very simple type

23 of obvious question. But if the government wants to ask
24 obvious questions like that, let them ask it. I would
25 hope the government wouldn't do that. It is not

HARRY RAPAPORT, CSR, CP, CM OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

5425
Watstein-redirect/White


1 necessary.

2 MR. WHITE: I am trying to avoid it, your Honor.

3 Q Now following down on page 9, Mr. Martin, the next

4 thing Mr. Martin says is: Now, there is, there is a way

5 to combat that. And he never really went out of his way

6 by, umm, umm actually asking the members to, and you said

7 really recommend people?

8 THE COURT: No. It is just the reverse -- I beg

9 your pardon. I am sorry.

10 Q And on the top of page 10, and Mr. Martin says, not

11 only that, I think if you, umm, make some kind of effort

12 to do so, think of the leads that you get. I mean these

13 are highly qualified leads.

14 Let me stop there for a minute.

15 MR. NELSON: Judge, I am objecting to him

16 stopping in the middle of sentences, the rule of

17 completeness would require at least the completeness of a

18 sentence.

19 THE COURT: Not necessarily. Depending on what

20 the question is. You might be right. But what is the

21 question?




Systemic Corruption Examples At Its Worst   - The Who's Who Worldwide Registry Tragedy

This site is concerned with the Who's Who Worldwide Registry tragedy, and the double scandal of government and judical corruption in one of the Systemic Corruption Examples At Its Worst and the concomitant news media blackout regarding this incredible story.

Sixteen weeks of oft-explosive testimony, yet not a word in any of 1200 news archives. This alone supports the claim that this was a genuinely dirty trial; in fact, one of the dirtiest trials of the most recent century.

Show your support for justice, for exoneration of the innocent, and perhaps most importantly, government accountability, by urgently contacting your Senator, the White House, and the U.S. Department of Justice.



The Who's Who Worldwide Registry Tragedy
How Thomas FX Dunn demonstrated himself to be the Dumbest Lawyer In The Nation
Dirtiest Trials Of The Most Recent Century


Dirtiest Trials of the Most Recent Century - Miscarriages of Justice

How rare it is to find a case that can offer not merely two or three, instead, more than a dozen major reasons for overturning that conviction.
Here is a case studied by a respected federal judge for many months, who found that no crime had been committed, and dismissed the case.

Reed Elsevier, Ltd, as the single richest and most powerful publisher in more than one hundred countries around the world,
easily. empirically and truthfully described as one of the most corrupt corporations in all of human history,
perverted the foundations of American justice in the Who's Who Worldwide case with cash, power, and perqs.

Imagine a trial where not ten percent of the proceedings have ANY connection with most of the defendants.
That alone should require a separation of trial. In this case, NOT EVEN ONE PERCENT of the proceedings,
accusations, presented evidence, or accepted facts, had anything to do with the "sales" defendants.

The Who's Who Worldwide case was all about Bruce Gordon, his machinations and his accountant,
and the many companies operated in secrecy by Gordon and Liz Sauter, his true "henchman."

For days and days and weeks and weeks, all the discussion was about Gordon and his actions.
Prosecution witness after prosecution witness exculpated the sales defendants, yet,
this same judge who had previously dismissed the case after months of study,
was under one of the worst pressures any judge can be subjected to:
pressure from the federal court of appeals above him, who, in
New York's bailiwick, remains under the control of....
Reed Elsevier, the most powerful force today
in the American arena of jurisprudence.

This can be fixed by Presidential Pardon.
Call 202-456-1414 to lift your voice.