The Federal Case Against Frank Parlato – a Prosecution in Search of a Crime

Joe O’Hara

[This is Part 3 of a series of articles that I am writing about the U.S. v. Parlato Et Al case. Along the way, I will detail what a sham this case is – and how it was orchestrated by two inner circle members of the NXIVM criminal enterprise, Clare and Sara Bronfman, and a conman named Shmuel Shmueli – all three of whom just happened to be represented by the same attorney, William F. Savino. I will also explain how many of the slimy tactics that were used to indict Frank have become the norm in the everyday operations of the U.S. criminal justice system. Readers are encouraged to ask questions – which I will endeavor to answer on a timely basis].

Part 1: The Buffalo News Raises Questions About Frank Parlato’s Case – More Detailed Analysis Needed

Part 2: The Convoluted History of U.S. v. Parlato Began With Bronfman Sisters

*****

Most Americans have a general understanding of how our country’s criminal justice system works – or at least how it’s supposed to work.

The basic concepts are as follows:

– When allegations or evidence of a potential crime comes to light, an investigation is supposed to be undertaken to determine if any criminal activity took place – and, if so, who committed the underlying crime.

– If the investigation produces evidence that a crime did, in fact, take place – and it determines who it is that likely committed the crime – then the alleged perpetrator is formally charged.

– If the defendant does not plead guilty to the charge(s) that are brought against them (or some reduced variation thereof), a trial is held to determine their guilt or innocence.

That’s the way the system is supposed to work.

But all too often, the system doesn’t work that way at all.

Sometimes, even though there is evidence that potential crimes have been committed, no investigation takes place. Usually, that’s because the people who are supposed to conduct the investigation – or, more likely, those people’s bosses – have been bought off or scared off by the perpetrators or their political allies.

Sometimes, even though an investigation determines who it is that likely committed a crime, no prosecution takes place. Usually, that’s because the prosecutor has been bought off or scared off by the perpetrators or their political allies (Rarely – and usually only in cases involving minor crimes – the prosecutor will exercise their discretion and simply not do anything).

Sometimes – albeit very rarely – the judge who is presiding over a criminal case will dismiss the charges against the defendant because there is insufficient evidence to warrant a conviction.

And then there is the curious case of Frank Parlato, Jr.

*****

Shmuel Shmueli & the Bronfman Sisters

Based on my discussions with Frank – as well as the filings in his case and everything I’ve been able to read about the events leading up to charges being filed against him – it appears that Frank may have been targeted for prosecution.

Many people may have trouble wrapping their heads around the concept that the government would set out to prosecute someone before any investigation was undertaken.

Trust me, as someone who has been on the wrong side of that equation, it happens a lot more often than the general public might believe.

In Frank’s case, he had three enemies that were interested in seeing him taken down.

One was Shmuel Shmueli, a shady character who became entwined in a business development project that Frank had undertaken in Niagara Falls, NY.

The others were the infamous Bronfman sisters – Clare and Sara – who had originally hired Frank to rescue their $26 million investment in a Los Angeles real estate development project.

Interestingly enough, both of Frank’s enemies were represented by the same attorney: William F. Savino.

Savino is now a partner in the Woods Oviatt Gilman LLP law firm in Buffalo, NY.

And he has been earning big fees representing the Bronfman sisters in a variety of matters since at least 2005.

Unbothered by the sort of conscience that might lead other attorneys to decline taking on certain clients, Wee Willie Savino pretty much operates on the principle that “If the check clears, I’m in”.

*****

The Investigation & Indictment of Frank Parlato

Frank believes that Savino was instrumental in getting an investigation launched by the FBI Office in the Western District of New York concerning his business dealings with both Shmueli and the Bronfman sisters.

That investigation – which lasted for several years – resulted in a 19-count indictment against Frank back in November 2015.

While I will be analyzing that indictment in much more detail in a future post, suffice to say for now that it was heavy in bombast – and light on substance.

And as the Feds love to do, it involved the type of “over-charging” that makes for great headlines – and that often leads juries to believe that the defendant must be guilty of something.

After all, this was a 19 COUNT INDICTMENT.

Hell, Frank must be guilty of something if he was charged with that many crimes, right?

But, as I will explain in a future post, this particular indictment is like a driver being given 10 speeding tickets after the patrol car following him determined that he had been driving over the speed limit at ten different times over the course of one mile.

Yeah, technically, you can parse out the charges like that.

But that’s not the way the criminal justice system is supposed to work

*****

Former U.S. Assistant Attorney Anthony M. Bruce

As luck would have it – or something like that – Frank’s case was assigned to former U.S. Assistant Attorney Anthony M. Bruce (Bruce retired almost immediately after Frank was indicted).

Exactly when Bruce became involved in the matter is not known as of yet but it appears that he may have begun working on it at the same time that the FBI launched its investigation (It’s even possible that Savino got Bruce to ask the FBI to start investigating Frank).

What is known is that Bruce and Savino know each other quite well.

Both are members of the adjunct faculty at the University of Buffalo Law School.

And both travel in the same social circles in the Buffalo area.

What is also known is that Bruce had a well-earned reputation for cutting corners and doing unethical things while serving as an Assistant U.S. Attorney.

Think of Moira Kim Penza – and take away her 4” heels and all her ethical standards – and you have Anthony M. Bruce.

About a year ago, Frank ran some ads to find out if he was the only one who had been treated unfairly by Bruce.

The responses were overwhelming and bone-chilling.

Numerous lawyers, defendants, witnesses, and others came forward to describe how Bruce had acted inappropriately and unethically.

Introducing falsified documents in a criminal proceeding? CHECK!

Arranging for the burglary of an attorney’s office? CHECK!

Having a convicted killer falsely claim that someone else did the killings for which he was convicted? CHECK!

Indicting someone who had already served time for the crime he was accused of committing? CHECK!

*****

Much More to Follow

Buckle up, Frank Report readers.

Over the next few weeks, I will be delving into the details of Frank’s case – and explaining how the Feds are trying to utilize their power to destroy an innocent man.

I will also be providing you with some perspective on the U.S. criminal justice system.

If you think that Frank is the only victim of an out-of-control system, you’re wrong.

Hopefully, we can end this farce of a case before it goes any further.

I wasn’t able to adequately defend myself when the Feds came after me.

I damn sure don’t want Frank to suffer the same fate that I did.

J.J. O'Hara