1)
EMPLOYEE
EMPLOYEE2)BURGLARIZED AL PETTY FOR $98,000.
BURGLARIZED AL PETTY FOR $98,000.3)“PLANTED” THE $98,000 FOR THE FBI AND GOVERNMENT TO USE AS “EVIDENCE” FOR THEIR “BURDEN OF PROOF” THAT WAS NECESSARY FOR THE INITIAL FREEZING OF AL PETTY’S FUNDS ON APRIL 4TH, 2002.
“PLANTED” THE $98,000 FOR THE FBI AND GOVERNMENT TO USE AS “EVIDENCE” FOR THEIR “BURDEN OF PROOF” THAT WAS NECESSARY FOR THE INITIAL FREEZING OF AL PETTY’S FUNDS ON APRIL 4TH, 2002.4)ATTEMPTED TO BLACKMAIL AL PETTY FOR $1,000,000, AND CONSPIRED WITH OTHERS TO DO THE SAME.
ATTEMPTED TO BLACKMAIL AL PETTY FOR $1,000,000, AND CONSPIRED WITH OTHERS TO DO THE SAME.5)WAS A GOVERNMENT INFORMANT.
WAS A GOVERNMENT INFORMANT.6)COMMITTED “THEFT BY CHECK” AND “COMPUTER THEFT” BY ACCEPTING WAGES FROM AL PETTY WHILE ACTUALLY DOWNLOADING DOCUMENTS, IN REALITY WORKING FOR THE GOVERNMENT AND PROSECUTION.
COMMITTED “THEFT BY CHECK” AND “COMPUTER THEFT” BY ACCEPTING WAGES FROM AL PETTY WHILE ACTUALLY DOWNLOADING DOCUMENTS, IN REALITY WORKING FOR THE GOVERNMENT AND PROSECUTION.7)PAID APPROXIMATELY $10,200 FOR 10 TELECOM2000 BUSINESSES AND COLLECTED $61,000 FOR THAT PURCHASE, THEN AFTER NETTING $50,000 ON HER 10 TELECOM2000 BUSINESSES, SANDRA
PAID APPROXIMATELY $10,200 FOR 10 TELECOM2000 BUSINESSES AND COLLECTED $61,000 FOR THAT PURCHASE, THEN AFTER NETTING $50,000 ON HER 10 TELECOM2000 BUSINESSES, SANDRA8)FILED A CHARGE-BACK WITH HER CREDIT CARD COMPANY FOR HER PURCHASE PRICE AND RECEIVED THE $10,200 BACK ALTHOUGH SHE EARNED $61,000 FOR THE $10,200. THAT’S FRAUD!
FILED A CHARGE-BACK WITH HER CREDIT CARD COMPANY FOR HER PURCHASE PRICE AND RECEIVED THE $10,200 BACK ALTHOUGH SHE EARNED $61,000 FOR THE $10,200. THAT’S FRAUD!9)RECEIVED A COMPENSATION FOR THE TELECOM2000 BUSINESS THAT AL PETTY GAVE HER FOR CHRISTMAS 2001.
RECEIVED A COMPENSATION FOR THE TELECOM2000 BUSINESS THAT AL PETTY GAVE HER FOR CHRISTMAS 2001.10)PURCHASED AN ADDITIONAL 10 BUSINESSES, (PRO-10), FOR APPROXIMATELY $10,100
PURCHASED AN ADDITIONAL 10 BUSINESSES, (PRO-10), FOR APPROXIMATELY $10,100.
11)RECEIVED APPROXIMATELY $30,000 COMMISSIONS ON THE SECOND PRO-10 PURCHASE OF $10,000, TRIPLING HER PURCHASE PRICE.
RECEIVED APPROXIMATELY $30,000 COMMISSIONS ON THE SECOND PRO-10 PURCHASE OF $10,000, TRIPLING HER PURCHASE PRICE.12)ATTEMPTED TO PURCHASE 20 MORE BUSINESSES IN MARCH OF 2002, JUST BEFORE SHUT DOWN.
ATTEMPTED TO PURCHASE 20 MORE BUSINESSES IN MARCH OF 2002, JUST BEFORE SHUT DOWN.13)TOLD ANOTHER EMPLOYEE, DEBBIE GARRETT, THAT SHE SHOULD NOT PURCHASE FIVE BUSINESSES, AS SHE PLANNED TO DO. TOLD GARRETT THAT TELECOM2000 WAS A “SCAM”, AND THAT THE FBI WAS ABOUT TO SHUT AL PETTY DOWN! (ALTHOUGH SHE WAS ATTEMPTING TO SPEND $20,000 MORE FOR 20 ADDITIONAL BUSINESSES AT THAT TIME!) IF SHE THOUGHT AL PETTY WAS A “SCAM” SHE SHOULD BE PROSECUTED FOR “INVESTING IN A SCAM”, IN ADDITION TO HER OTHER CRIMES! INSTEAD, THE GOVERNMENT USED HER AS A KEY WITNESS TO CONVICT AL PETTY. No, she KNEW it was not a scam and that Al Petty was an honest man. If she was not convinced that Al Petty would Deliver his Guarantees 100% of the time, would she have spent tens of thousands more on purchases.
TOLD ANOTHER EMPLOYEE, DEBBIE GARRETT, THAT SHE SHOULD NOT PURCHASE FIVE BUSINESSES, AS SHE PLANNED TO DO. TOLD GARRETT THAT TELECOM2000 WAS A “SCAM”, AND THAT THE FBI WAS ABOUT TO SHUT AL PETTY DOWN! (ALTHOUGH SHE WAS ATTEMPTING TO SPEND $20,000 MORE FOR 20 ADDITIONAL BUSINESSES AT THAT TIME!) IF SHE THOUGHT AL PETTY WAS A “SCAM” SHE SHOULD BE PROSECUTED FOR “INVESTING IN A SCAM”, IN ADDITION TO HER OTHER CRIMES! INSTEAD, THE GOVERNMENT USED HER AS A KEY WITNESS TO CONVICT AL PETTY. No, she KNEW it was not a scam and that Al Petty was an honest man. If she was not convinced that Al Petty would Deliver his Guarantees 100% of the time, would she have spent tens of thousands more on purchases.14)THIS UN-CONVICTED BURGLAR, ATTEMPTED BLACKMAILER, DEFRAUDER, AS WELL AS THAT SHE PLAYED A KEY ROLE IN INFLUENCING AL PETTY TO BECOME AFFILIATED WITH THE ILL-FATED CDI GROUP INVOLVING THE FACE-TO-FACE MINISTRY ACCOUNT; YET SANDRA HALLEY WAS CHOSEN AS AN FBI INFORMANT AND KEY GOVERNMENT WITNESS.
THIS UN-CONVICTED BURGLAR, ATTEMPTED BLACKMAILER, DEFRAUDER, AS WELL AS THAT SHE PLAYED A KEY ROLE IN INFLUENCING AL PETTY TO BECOME AFFILIATED WITH THE ILL-FATED CDI GROUP INVOLVING THE FACE-TO-FACE MINISTRY ACCOUNT; YET SANDRA HALLEY WAS CHOSEN AS AN FBI INFORMANT AND KEY GOVERNMENT WITNESS.15)AS A HOSTILE GOVERNMENT WITNESS, TRACI KENNER CHOSE SANDRA HALLEY, FULLY AWARE OF HER CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES, TO ‘EXPLAIN’ THE OPERATIONAL FUNCTIONS OF TELECOM2000, PROMPTED BY KENNER’S HALF-TRUTH AND DECEPTIVE QUESTIONS, TO THE JURY, AND THE COURT! HOW COULD A DECEITFUL CRIMINAL WHO HAD MADE EVERY EFFORT TO DESTROY AL PETTY AND THE LIVES OF 3,000 TELECOM2000 BUSINESS OWNERS BE EXPECTED TO DO ANYTHING BUT DECEIVE THE JURY?
AS A HOSTILE GOVERNMENT WITNESS, TRACI KENNER CHOSE SANDRA HALLEY, FULLY AWARE OF HER CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES, TO ‘EXPLAIN’ THE OPERATIONAL FUNCTIONS OF TELECOM2000, PROMPTED BY KENNER’S HALF-TRUTH AND DECEPTIVE QUESTIONS, TO THE JURY, AND THE COURT! HOW COULD A DECEITFUL CRIMINAL WHO HAD MADE EVERY EFFORT TO DESTROY AL PETTY AND THE LIVES OF 3,000 TELECOM2000 BUSINESS OWNERS BE EXPECTED TO DO ANYTHING BUT DECEIVE THE JURY?KENNER: (V3; P154,155;L24-25 AND 1-8) “IT MENTIONED THAT YOU HAD INVESTMENTS IN TELECOM2000 NETWORK.
HALLEY: “THAT’S CORRECT”
KENNER: “AND HOW MUCH HAD YOU INVESTED IN TTN?”
HALLEY: “I HAD PURCHASED A PRO-10, A PRO-11 THOUGH 20. WE WERE GIVEN A PRO-01 AS A CHRISTMAS GIFT. AND THEN, ON MARCH 9TH I HAD SUBMITTED PAPERWORK TO PURCHASE ANOTHER 20 POSITIONS, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN A PRO-22 THROUGH 41.
KENNER: (V3;P155;L17-24) “NOW, DID YOU RECEIVE A ‘CHARGE BACK’ ON YOUR CREDIT CARD?”
HALLEY: “YES, I CHARGED BACK ALL OF THE POSITIONS AND WAS REFUNDED PROBABLY ALL BUT ABOUT $500.
KENNER: “AND WHAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE CHARGE BACK?”
HALLEY: “THE CONTRACT WAS NOT FULFILLED. I HAD A CONTRACT. I SUBMITTED THE CONTRACT TO THE CREDIT CARD COMPANIES, DOCUMENTATION THAT THE CONTRACT WAS NOT FULFILLED, AND THEY REFUNDED MY INVESTMENT.”
COMMENT: Note that as usual, Kenner did not question HALLEY about the following FACTS. Here is a quick chart on SANDRA HALLEY’S FRAUDULENT MIS-USE OF her credit cards to DEFRAUD AL PETTY. If Kenner had presented this to the Jury, it would have discredited HALLEY with the Jury (more ½ truths!)
SANDRA HALLEY
WHATREC’D REC’D SUB TTLPAIDFORCOMMISSIONSCHARGEBACK REC’D1) $10,200 PRO-10$61,000 +$10,200$71,200
PRO-10$61,000 +$10,200$71,200 2) $10,100 PRO-10$30,000(App)+10,100 40,100
PRO-10$30,000(App)+10,100 40,100T $20,300 PRO-20$91,000 +$20,300$111,300
PRO-20$91,000 +$20,300$111,300 NET PROFIT ($111,300 Received, minus $20,300 spent = $91,000)
When Sandra filled out her TeleCom2000 applications for her home Long Distance Service, she did NOT complete the forms properly and follow up. Therefore, unlike all other customers, who DID Receive Long Distance, she did not receive her Long Distance service at home. (She actually didn’t want to change L.D. Carriers.) Although she DID receive re-imbursement checks for her long distance, (which she KNEW was FRAUD because she did not have to pay for it!), and although she received a NET PROFIT of approximately $50,000 on an out of pocket cost for her initial PRO-10, plus several hundred dollars on the PRO-01 that Al Petty gave her for Christmas, SHE FELT JUSTIFIED to ask for, and receive, re-imbursement for the $10,000 it cost her to net a lucrative $50,000!Of course, if she had not contributed so greatly to the events that culminated in the shut down, she would have earned approximately $140,000 NET PROFIT on her second PRO-10 and PRO-20! And SHE was chosen by TRACI KENNER to present a “Twisted Version” of TeleCom2000 and Al Petty to the court. And, as of this date, this Burglar, Embezzler, DeFRAUDER, LIAR & BLACKMAILER is walking around FREE, while the man she DEFRAUDED is serving 24 years in Prison! (3-8-04) JUSTICE???BELOW IS THE ACCOUNT OF THE $98,000 BURGLARY & “PLANT” FOR THE FBI!
KENNER: (V3; P156, 157, 158; L6-25; 1-25; I) “AFTER THAT MEETING, (Note: on March 31st), DID YOU RETURN TO THE TELECOM2000 NETWORK OFFICES?” (COMMENT: Halley was no longer employed.)
HALLEY: “LATER IN THE WEEK, THE FOLLOWING WEEK, I DID RETURN OUT THERE TO SATISFY MY CURIOSITY THAT HE WAS NOT THERE, THAT THERE WAS NO ONE THERE AND THERE WERE NO---THE EQUIPMENT WAS GONE."
KENNER: “AND WAS ANYONE THERE WHEN YOU GOT THERE?”
HALLEY: “NOT WHEN I DROVE UP. WHILE I WAS THERE, I DID ENCOUNTER UPS AND FEDEX TRYING TO MAKE DELIVERIES, AND I JUST SUGGESTED THAT THEY NOT LEAVE THEIR DOCUMENTS DUE TO THE FACT THERE WAS NO ONE THERE TO RECEIVE THEM”.
COMMENT: HALLEY WAS NOT STILL AN EMPLOYEE. THOSE PACKAGES BELONGED TO AL PETTY AND Future TeleCom2000 Business Owners! At this time, TeleCom2000 had not yet been shut down! (This was on April 2nd 2002, Tuesday before the funds were frozen on Thursday, April 4th.) AL PETTY had commissioned other persons to pick up those packages. SANDRA HALLEY had NO authority to tell the couriers to take them back. There was probably $300,000 - $400,000 in those packages! Those funds were later seized at the courier’s depots by the FBI. This means that the persons who sent the funds will receive “nickels on the dollar”, if ANYTHING (?) unless Al Petty is vindicated and is able to once again operate TeleCom2000! (Back to the Burglary.
KENNER: “AND DID THEY TAKE THE DOCUMENTS, WHICH THEY WERE TRYING TO DELIVER, BACK WITH THEM?”
HALLEY: “YES, THEY DID.”
KENNER: “DID YOU ACTUALLY GO---DID YOU ACTUALLY ENTER THE OFFICES?
HALLEY: “YES, I WENT AROUND TO THE END OF THE TRAILER, THE WINDOW WAS HALF---NOT HALF, BUT PROBABLY A QUARTER OF THE WAY OPEN. I COULD SEE IN THAT THE EQUIPMENT WAS GONE. THE PLACE LOOKED LIKE IT HAD BEEN RANSACKED, AND I ALSO SAW A STACK OF OVERNIGHT DELIVERY PACKAGES LYING THERE ON THE DESK.
KENNER: “WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THOSE?”
COMMENT: The first time that AL PETTY, OR COUNSEL, was told about this burglary was by HALLEY AND KENNER during this testimony AT THE TRIAL! Notice that the above question “WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THOSE”, by KENNER, CLEARLY SHOWS THAT the PROSECUTION ALREADY KNEW that HALLEY BROKE IN AND BURGLARIZED AL PETTY. This “SUPPRESSION OF EVIDENCE” in DISCOVERY, IF REVEALED AS REQUIRED BY LAW, WOULD HAVE CHANGED THE ENTIRE TRIAL, IF NOT CANCELLED IT!
KENNER: (note: repeat of question by editor) “WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THOSE?” (note: the overnight packages)
HALLEY: “I ENTERED THE HOUSE THROUGH THAT WINDOW THAT WAS NOT LOCKED, WAS NOT EVEN CLOSED. I TOOK THE DOCUMENTS, LOOKING AT THE VOLUME. I CALLED MY ATTORNEY, MY PERSONAL ATTORNEY, AND ASKED HIM WHAT I COULD ‘LAWFULLY’ DO. AND HE SAID, ‘YOU CAN PLACE THOSE DOCUMENTS ON THE PROPERTY, WHERE THEY’RE NOT READILY SEEN, AS LONG AS YOU LEAVE THEM ON THE PROPERTY’. I TOOK THE DOCUMENTS. I PUT THEM IN A ---ONE OF THOSE LITTLE CELLOPHANE FOOD BAGS, FROM ONE OF THE GROCERY STORES OR WALMART, AND PUT THEM UNDER THE UNDER PINNING ON THE MOBILE HOME.”
KENNER: “MS. HALLEY, I DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO A STACK OF PICTURES IN FRONT OF YOU”--------“WHAT IS DEPICTED IN THOSE THREE PHOTOGRAPHS?”---------“AND WHAT DOES NUMBER 45 DEPICT?”
HALLEY: “IT’S THE ACTUAL PHOTO OF THE DOCUMENTS IN THE PLASTIC BAG WHERE I LEANED THEM UP AGAINST THE UNDER PINNING, ON THE UNDER NEATH SIDE OF THE UNDERPINNING.”
COMMENT: The following is an “Edited for FACTS” version of HALLEY’S description of her “BREAKING, ENTERING, BURGLARY, TRESPASSING, AND LIES!
HALLEY: ---“I DID RETURN OUT THERE ‘TO SATISFY MY CURIOSITY’”
COMMENT: SANDRA HALLEY was NO LONGER an employee. She KNEW; after her meeting with Al Petty, on Sunday, Mar 31st, before her “returning” on Tuesday, April 2nd; that she was NOT WELCOME on Al Petty’s property. Therefore, by entering those 20 acres and the offices of TeleCom2000, she was guilty of:
1)TRESPASSING
TRESPASSINGHALLEY: “I DID ENCOUNTER UPS AND FEDEX TRYING TO MAKE DELIVERIES, AND I JUST SUGGESTED THAT THEY NOT LEAVE THEIR DOCUMENTS.”
COMMENT: HALLEY had NO authority to advise COURIERS who were delivering packages to TeleCom2000. Those packages belonged to TeleCom2000. This occurred 2 days BEFORE the FREEZE. Al Petty had authorized 2 employees to pick up those packages so they could be credited to the purchasers and Deposited. As stated previously, the cashiers checks that were in those packages were returned to the UPS & FEDEX DEPOTS. They were then seized by the government. The government is still holding those. If they had simply returned them to the senders, these persons would have been saved the IRREPARABLE HARM OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of Dollars in Losses. Does anyone really believe that the government tries to protect her citizens? If they WERE concerned about the victims, (they created!), the government would have returned those unopened packages by their senders. Instead, “ROBB EVANS”, the court appointed receiver has control over them.
By her actions, HALLEY committed:
2)FRAUD
FRAUDHALLEY: “I WENT AROUND TO THE END OF THE TRAILER, THE WINDOW WAS”----“A QUARTER OF THE WAY OPEN.”---“I ALSO SAW A STACK OF OVERNIGHT DELIVERY PACKAGES LYING THERE ON THE DESK”
COMMENT: HALLEY seemed to ‘Justify’ her ‘BREAKING AND ENTERING’ through a window because it wasn’t locked. Notice now, that BEFORE HALLEY admits to the burglary, KENNER asked HALLEY, “what DID YOU DO WITH THOSE?” (see previous comments), but the FACT is that KENNER KNEW about the burglary BEFORE the trial, but SUPPRESSED this important EVIDENCE OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY by an informant and key government witness. The prosecution did NOT reveal this “damaging to them” evidence until HALLEY testified at the trial.
HALLEY: “I ENTERED THE HOUSE THROUGH THAT WINDOW THAT WAS NOT LOCKED, I TOOK THE DOCUMENTS”.
3)BURGLARY
BURGLARYHALLEY: “LOOKING AT THE VOLUME”
COMMENT: Sandra could not have “LOOKED AT THE VOLUME” WITHOUT OPENING MAIL THAT DID NOT BELONG TO HER! Therefore, she was also guilty of:
4)OPENING MAIL UNAUTHORIZED
OPENING MAIL UNAUTHORIZEDHALLEY: “I CALLED MY ATTORNEY, MY PERSONAL ATTORNEY AND ASKED HIM WHAT I COULD LAWFULLY DO”.
COMMENT: Here we have a woman who has just burglarized a corporate office. She says that she called her ‘personal’ attorney to ask him what she could ‘LAWFULLY DO’. This story is preposterous! She was at the SCENE UNLAWFULLY, supposedly asking her attorney what she could “LAWFULLY DO”! JOHN R. SMITH should have followed through, on cross, with many questions regarding this burglary! One should have been, “WHAT IS THE NAME OF THAT ATTORNEY YOU CALLED”? (But, of course, as usual, the inept attorney for Al Petty did not follow through!
HALLEY: “HE SAID, YOU CAN PLACE THOSE DOCUMENTS ON THE PROPERTY.”
COMMENT: “THE DOCUMENTS WERE ALREADY ON THE PROPERTY!” HALLEY had no authorization to even be ‘ON THE PROPERTY’! But Al Petty’s Mail did belong on the property! What attorney would advise a client, who has just admitted to BURGLARY, and who is still on the scene of the crime, to “TAKE DOCUMENTS” that contained $98,000 in Cashiers Checks that did NOT belong to her, and do anything with them? Any Attorney would have told her to “GET OUT OF THERE AS QUICKLY AS YOU CAN AND DON’T LEAVE ANY FINGER PRINTS OR TRACES, AND DON’T TELL ANYONE WHAT YOU DID! YOU COULD BE PUT IN JAIL FOR BURGLARY!”
HALLEY: “The “attorney” continues;--- (PLACE THOSE DOCUMENTS) WHERE THEY’RE NOT READILY SEEN.”
COMMENTS: Would any attorney advise a burglar-client to hide $98,000 from its rightful owner? Of course Not! IF HALLEY had not been an informant, and involved in a conspiracy to DEFRAUD AL PETTY, & 3,000 TeleCom2000 Business Owners, she would have wanted to, if she did ANYTHING, contact Al Petty and tell him, the owner of the $98,000, about the funds, and where they were. She certainly would not have HIDDEN them from their rightful owner, Al Petty, IF she was interested in protecting the funds for Al Petty and the TeleCom2000 Business Owners.
At this time, there is no proof of it, however, many circumstances point to this action by HALLEY as an important factor in her involvement with the FBI and government in their mutual conspiracy to convict Al Petty. Since it is a fact, for example, that HALLEY was already working with the prosecution against Al Petty, did she actually call FBI Agent HERSLEY, or Prosecutor KENNER instead of “HER PERSONAL ATTORNEY”. No logical person could believe that she would call her attorney, OR that her attorney would offer her the advice she claims he gave her. Could it be that she called HERSLEY & that HE told her to “PLANT THE $98,000 under the trailer so that he could find it; that he would be searching the property soon. This would give him some ‘evidence’, (although planted), for his “BURDEN OF PROOF” that he needed to justify the TRO, (two days after Sandra’s BURGLARY), that “AL PETTY INTENDED TO ABSCOND WITH THE FUNDS”.HALLEY: “I TOOK THE DOCUMENTS”.
COMMENT: Here, on the witness stand, 7 months AFTER the Burglary, HALLEY admits to an action she took that WOULD HAVE changed the ENTIRE CASE IF this SUPPRESSED evidence had been made known in DISCOVERY, as required by law! She finally admits to, and REVEALS, HER BURGLARY.
HALLEY: “(I) PUT THEM UNDER THE UNDERPINNING ON THE UNDERNEATH SIDE OF THE UNDERPINNING”.
COMMENT: Apparently HALLEY pulled some of the underpinning loose to take the advice of WHOEVER, (?), she talked to, in order to hide the $98,000 from Al Petty, its rightful owner, and plant it in a place convenient for the FBI to find during their search a few days later. Here is proof that the FBI Knew it was there. In the “contraband” listed by the FBI in their search warrant, the FBI said they WOULD FIND “Cashiers checks”. When Al Petty read the search warrant he told his attorney that there were NO cashiers’ checks on the property, that he had hidden NOTHING. When the FBI subsequently listed ‘Cashiers checks’ on the list of contraband found in the search, Al Petty told several persons that was impossible because all things of that nature had been collected and deposited and credited to the purchaser.
Seven months then passed before Al Petty heard from SANDRA, at HIS TRIAL, the facts of “How that contraband” was found on the property. SANDRA HALLEY has still not been prosecuted for this crime, (as of 11-1-04). She went on to become A KEY INFORMANT & WITNESS in the government’s conspiracy to convict Al Petty!IS THIS WHAT JUSTICE IN THE EAST TEXAS JUDICIAL SYSTEM IS ALL ABOUT?As was her custom, the last question asked by KENNER before passing the witness was a HALF-TRUTH, (False statement, according to HANNAH’S Definition). As the prosecution realized Al Petty had 1) COMMITTED NO DECEPTION OR FRAUD or, 2) INTENDED to commit NO FRAUD OR DECEPTION, the emphasis quickly shifted in the trial to “BUT IF WE HAD NOT STOPPED HIM, AL PETTY WOULD HAVE, IN THE FUTURE SOMETIME, DECEIVED AND DEFRAUDED CITIZENS”. In order to “weave this deceitful web”, the government, along with the persuasive LIES & FABRICATIONS of their “EXPERT” Witness WILLIAM CUNNINGHAM FOCUSED ON PROVING that AL PETTY WAS RUNNING A “PONZI SCHEME”, although Al Petty was not on trial for anything other than “DECEIVING AND DEFRAUDING”, which All testimony and evidence proved he did NOT COMMIT. Nor was he “running a Ponzi Scheme!The basic theme of a PONZI SCHEME is that “FUNDS RECEIVED by NEW INVESTORS are used to pay the EARLIER INVESTORS”. Knowing that she could depend on SANDRA HALLEY to do whatever she could to get Al Petty convicted, (and avoid prosecution for her crimes), she asked the following question of HALLEY, then passed the witness. Notice how KENNER totally shifts the focus from Al Petty’s 98 counts of the indictment to “PONZI”.KENNER: (V3; P159; L7-9) “WHAT FUNDS WERE USED TO PAY OFF THE COMMISSIONS TO INVESTORS?”
COMMENT: That is the definition of a “PONZI SCHEME”!
HALLEY: “THE ONLY FUNDS WE HAD COMING IN WERE FUNDS FROM NEW INVESTORS”.
KENNER: “PASS THE WITNESS”.
COMMENT: Although KENNER KNEW that HALLEY was aware that Al Petty received commissions from his sales of Long Distance and Cell Phones, as well as income from the MARKETING DIVISION of ALL TeleCom2000 Businesses sold, KENNER KNEW that SANDRA would give her the desired answer so that she could end her ‘direct’ and ‘pass the witness’ immediately after planting this FALSE INFORMATION into the minds of the Jurors that would enable her to convict Al Petty of a PONZI SCHEME, although he was not even on trial for running a PONZI! And, of course, “TECHNOLOGY ILLITERATE” JOHN R. SMITH could be depended upon by TRACI KENNER to not follow through on cross examination and expose KENNER & HALLEY for Lying to the Jury.
The following testimony regards, FACE TO FACE, the “Ministry account” that Al Petty opened at HALLEY’S urging.
SMITH: (V3; P183-184; L25-1-7) “AND HE HAS A DEEP, DEEP FEELING FOR MUSIC, IS THAT CORRECT?”
HALLEY: “THAT IS CORRECT.”
SMITH: “AND A DEEP, DEEP FEELING FOR YOUNG PEOPLE TO GET INTO THE MUSIC---INTO MUSIC, IS THAT CORRECT?
COMMENT: Al Petty spent 50 years in the Music Industry in virtually EVERY capacity. He has NEVER encouraged anyone, but a FEW persons to “get into music”. UNLESS a person is among the top 10% of gifted individuals, “getting into” the music industry is a big mistake. ONLY A SELECT FEW have “what it takes” to “make it” in the music industry. Therefore, although Al Petty was extremely successful in music and has taught thousands of students, he certainly did NOT intend to use the Ministry Account to “encourage young people to get into music”.
However, Al Petty DOES have a STRONG EMPATHY for those professionals who are in the music industry and for the fans of music, especially regarding his ‘BELOVED” steel guitar! This is what motivated Al Petty to DONATE $10,000 each to the “INTERNATIONAL STEEL GUITAR HALL OF FAME”, as well as the “TEXAS STEEL GUITAR ASSOCIATION” HALL OF FAME, (OF WHICH he is a Hall of Fame MEMBER).This dialogue between JOHN R. SMITH and SANDRA HALLEY, stating that Al Petty formed the Ministerial Account to “encourage young people to get into music” is a fabrication of SANDRA HALLEY AND JOHN R. SMITH. There was nothing on the recording of the Dec. meeting to even suggest that Al Petty was setting up the FACE TO FACE Account “to encourage young people to get into music”.HALLEY: “THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING”.
SMITH: “AND, AS SUCH, HE WANTED TO PROVIDE MONIES FOR THAT PURPOSE, IS THAT CORRECT?”
HALLEY: “THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING.”
FOLLOWING IS AN EXAMPLE OF HALLEY’S HOSTILITY AND FALSE TESTIMONY to paint an unfavorable picture of Al Petty.
SMITH: (V3; P181-L1-20) “HOW DID MR. PETTY TAKE IT WHEN PEOPLE CALLED THAT HADN’T RECEIVED THEIR CHECKS?”
HALLEY: “HE WOULD ‘RANT AND RAVE’”!
SMITH: “AND THEN, DID HE DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT TO MAKE SURE THEY GOT THEIR CHECK?”
HALLEY: “HIM PERSONALLY?”
SMITH: “DID HE CAUSE IT TO BE DONE?”
HALLEY: “I WAS CONSTANTLY RESEARCHING AND SCHEDULING THINGS THAT HAD BEEN MISPLACED, OR TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY THEY DIDN’T---WEREN’T SCHEDULED.”
SMITH: “MY QUESTION WAS, ‘WHEN SOMEONE FELL THROUGH THE CRACKS’ AND THEY CALLED MR. PETTY, DID HE CAUSE THOSE CHECKS, THROUGH WHATEVER RESOURCE, TO BE WRITTEN?”
HANNAH: “SEEMS LIKE A TERRIBLY SIMPLE QUESTION TO ME, MS. HALLEY. SEE IF YOU CAN ANSWER IT QUICKLY AND SIMPLY!
HALLEY: “I KNOW THAT HE HAD SOME OF THE EMPLOYEES HAND-WRITE SOME CHECKS.”
COMMENT: Al Petty instructed SANDRA HALLEY MANY TIMES to “write checks to EVERY PERSON who may have ‘fallen through the cracks’ and she was very AWARE that Al Petty’s ‘PASSION’ was to get those checks out ON TIME! YET she refused to EVER, even at the urging of JUDGE HANNAH, answer the question truthfully! But what else could be expected from a witness who was a confessed burglar, as well as thief and extortionist. Especially when she was in alliance with someone like the Prosecutor, TRACI KENNER!
SMITH: “DID HE CAUSED THE CHECKS TO BE WRITTEN SO THAT HIS BUSINESS OWNERS WOULD BE SATISFIED, MS. HALLEY?”
HALLEY: “IN SOME INSTANCES”.
COMMENT: SANDRA LIED, AS USUAL! She Knew that in “ALL instances”, Al Petty “got the checks out”!! That never once did he neglect to pay ANYONE.
SMITH: (V3; P185; L2-8) “NOW, WHEN MS. KENNER ASKED YOU HOW MANY PEOPLE ATTENDED OUT THERE, (note: the January 2002 convention), YOU SAID ‘MORE THAN 50’, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IS THAT CORRECT?”
HALLEY: “I SAID, ‘TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE THERE WAS PROBABLY MORE THAN A HUNDRED’. I DON’T REMEMBER THE SPECIFIC COUNT.”
SMITH: “COULD THERE BE AS MANY AS 300?”
HALLEY: “THERE VERY WELL COULD HAVE BEEN, DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE ROOM, AND WE DID KEEP BRINGING IN EXTRA CHAIRS.”
COMMENT: Her answer was but another example of the “unjust fact” that KENNER KNEW that she could depend on HALLEY to LIE to the Jury to convict Al Petty. ANYONE can tell the difference between “100 & 300” persons!
COMMENT on the following: The government Knew, and JOHN R. SMITH KNEW; that SANDRA HALLEY, ACCORDING TO THE GOVERNMENT REPORTS, downloaded 241 pages of documents for the FBI. YET, HALLEY claims she had no contact with the FBI until AFTER EASTER SUNDAY. SANDRA did NOT work after Good Friday, before Easter Sunday! Therefore she was lying when she said she had no contact until after Easter Sunday, because there were NO COMPUTERS at the TeleCom2000 offices that she could have downloaded the 241 pages from! Just another example of the government’s use of a lying, perjurized witness.
SMITH: (V3; P187; L10-24) “NOW, THE 29TH OF MARCH WAS GOOD FRIDAY, IS THAT CORRECT?”
HALLEY: “CORRECT”
SMITH: “ON THAT DATE, DID YOU DOWNLOAD ANY RECORDS OFF OF MR. PETTY’S COMPUTER FOR THE GOVERNMENT?”
COMMENT: Another government informant and witness, (IVAN PEJOVICH) plus several persons told Al Petty that they saw HALLEY downloading documents for the government on the morning of Good Friday. They told Al that morning that they saw the documents, and that they also heard (THE FIRST INFORMANT) VIRGINIA MAYO, asking HALLEY to help HER download documents. They also heard Sandra telling employees that they were going to be shut down by the FBI. YET, SANDRA replied to J.R. SMITH’S question about whether she downloaded documents on Good Friday in this way:
HALLEY: “NO, SIR.”
SMITH: “WHEN DID YOU FIRST BECOME A GOVERNMENT WITNESS?”
HALLEY: “I CANNOT RECALL THE EXACT DATE, BUT IT WAS THE WEEK FOLLOWING THE EASTER SUNDAY ENCOUNTER WITH MR. PETTY.”
RE-DIRECT
COMMENT: The following is a hypothetical that is directly applicable to the next FALSE DIALOGUE between TRACI KENNER AND SANDRA HALLEY, with “INTENT TO DECEIVE” the Jury into convicting Al Petty:
1)A Bank receives $10,000 for deposit into a C.D.
A Bank receives $10,000 for deposit into a C.D.2)The bank GUARANTEES the holder of the C.D. that they will receive 5% interest on their C.D. if they leave it on deposit for one year. This means that:
The bank GUARANTEES the holder of the C.D. that they will receive 5% interest on their C.D. if they leave it on deposit for one year. This means that:3)The return for the C.D. will be, (5% x $10,000=) $500, plus the $10,000 investment=) $10,500.
The return for the C.D. will be, (5% x $10,000=) $500, plus the $10,000 investment=) $10,500.4)The bank “puts the investor’s $10,000 to work”. It earns 10% for the bank.
The bank “puts the investor’s $10,000 to work”. It earns 10% for the bank.5)The bank therefore earns, (10,000 x 10 %=), $1,000 on the investor’s $10,000.
The bank therefore earns, (10,000 x 10 %=), $1,000 on the investor’s $10,000.6)The Bank pays the investor $500.
The Bank pays the investor $500.7)The Bank makes a net profit of $500 on the transaction.
The Bank makes a net profit of $500 on the transaction.7a) Note that the bank offered NO PRODUCT OR SERVICE as a part of their agreement. “Money generating more money” is the ONLY service. Al Petty offered Long Distance, Cell Phone, Marketing and outsourced offices!
8)The Government declares that the bank is a fraudulent operation because it Guaranteed the customer $500 more than the customer invested. The government contends that the transaction was deceptive and illegal because the original transaction caused the Bank to be operating at a “NET LOSS” of $500, because the bank guaranteed the investor $500. MORE than they invested and made the guarantee BEFORE they had earned the bank’s 10%. Therefore the bank was guilty of operating “at a Net Loss”. Of course the above hypothetical is absurd, but listen to this “ALL – TOO REAL Dialogue between Prosecutor TRACI KENNER and “INFORMANT – WITNESS – BURGLAR”, SANDRA HALLEY! KEEP THIS “ABSURDITY” IN MIND AS YOU READ THE FOLLOWING “DEPTHS OF DECEIT” TO WHICH THE PROSECUTION SANK TO WRONGLY CONVICT AL PETTY.
The Government declares that the bank is a fraudulent operation because it Guaranteed the customer $500 more than the customer invested. The government contends that the transaction was deceptive and illegal because the original transaction caused the Bank to be operating at a “NET LOSS” of $500, because the bank guaranteed the investor $500. MORE than they invested and made the guarantee BEFORE they had earned the bank’s 10%. Therefore the bank was guilty of operating “at a Net Loss”. Of course the above hypothetical is absurd, but listen to this “ALL – TOO REAL Dialogue between Prosecutor TRACI KENNER and “INFORMANT – WITNESS – BURGLAR”, SANDRA HALLEY! KEEP THIS “ABSURDITY” IN MIND AS YOU READ THE FOLLOWING “DEPTHS OF DECEIT” TO WHICH THE PROSECUTION SANK TO WRONGLY CONVICT AL PETTY.KENNER: “(V3; P190; L2-17) “ANALYZING TLECOM2000 NETWORK SALE OF BUSINESS UNDER THAT MODEL---AND I’LL JUST LOOK AT A ‘PRO-ONE’---WOULD YOU AGREE THAT THE COST OF THE PRO ONE, OR THE SELLING PRICE OF THE PRO-ONE IS AROUND $1,315.88?
HALLEY: “CORRECT”
KENNER: “AND FOR THAT, MR. PETTY OBLIGATED TELECOM2000 NETWORK TO PAY $3,779.34?
COMMENT: This was the same principle used by the bank to GUARANTEE, in advance, $10,500 for an investment of $10,000.
HALLEY: “CORRECT”
KENNER: “SO THAT RESULTS IN A PROFIT, AT LEAST ACCORDING TO THE DEMO CHARTS THAT WE LOOKED AT EARLIER, A PROFIT TO THE INVESTOR OF $2,463.46?
HALLEY: “THAT IS CORRECT.”
COMMENT: As has been explained elsewhere, approximately $600 of the purchase price for a PRO-ONE TeleCom2000 Business was allocated to TELECOM2000 MARKETING SERVICES. Because of his years of marketing experience, combined with DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY, AL PETTY MARKETED Long Distance and Cell Phone Services for less than 10% of marketing costs incurred by SPRINT & AT&T, etc! In fact Al Petty actually generated about 4 to $5,000 income from the $600 that he received as Marketing expenditures from the sale of each TeleCom2000 Business. Therefore, from $4,500 income generated from each $600 expended, Al Petty could easily GUARANTEE A NET – PROFIT – RETURN of $2,463.46! (Before Al Petty ever GUARANTEED any return on the Purchase of a Business, he ran charts for 5 months, AFTER he developed the marketing concept, to ENSURE that the MONEY WOULD ALWAYS BE THERE TO PAY THE 500 – 1300% returns he GUARRANTEED!)
Therefore Al Petty was NOT ever operating at a “NET LOSS” as described by KENNER & HALLEY in their “PRESENTATION OF DECEIT” to the Jury and Court. The government would have as much reason to declare that a bank who guarantees $10,500 for a $10,000 investment is operating at a NET LOSS, and then seize their assets, ruin the lives of all of the bank’s investors and imprison the principals of a bank, as they had VALID reason to seize the assets of Al Petty-TeleCom2000, ruin the lives of 3,000 TeleCom2000 Business Owners and imprison Al Petty for LIFE, (24 years).However the above pattern of DECEIT AND FRAUD by the government and their witnesses, emerged as the RULE, rather than the ‘occasional exception’. And the tragedy is that, with the POWER of title of the case, “THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA VS AL PETTY”, the government was able to ABUSE their virtually unlimited Power, to the degree that their deception succeeded in convicting an innocent Businessman, Al Petty.