Plum City – (AbelDanger.net). United States Marine Field McConnell has linked
his brother-in-law and erstwhile pro hac vice lawyer Eric. B. Marcy, and Lena Trudeau to Ottawa-based CAI private-equity forfeiture funds, apparently used to finance the Cold Squad snuff-film scripts, casting and post-production projects associated with the alleged contract killings (hits) of Deborah Furlong and Wendy Ladner Beaudry.
McConnell claims that Marcy and Trudeau began moving CAI asset forfeiture funds into CORRECTIONAL SERVICE CANADA and U.S. Bureau of Prisons’ Inmate Trusts in 1998 and allegedly proceeded to use the funds to reward alibied parolees’ posing as Cold Squad actors in a global IMDb murder-for-hire racket.
“STATEMENT OF MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITY CORRECTIONAL SERVICE CANADA[Engineered Taliban Greaat Escape] Departmental management is responsible for these future-oriented financial statements, including responsibility for the appropriateness of the assumptions on which these statements are prepared. These statements are based on the best information available and assumptions adopted as at March 23, 2012 and reflect the plans described in the Report on Plans and Priorities. Correctional Service Canada Departmental Audit Committee also oversees management’s responsibilities for maintaining adequate control systems and the quality of financial reporting, and recommends the future oriented financial statements to the Commissioner.
Pursuant to section 111 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Regulations, the Inmate Trust Fund is credited with moneys received from inmates at the time of incarceration, net of earnings of inmates from employment inside institutions, moneys received for inmates while in custody, moneys received from sales of hobbycraft, moneys earned through work while on day parole, and interest. Disbursements may occur either at the time of release or for inmate purchases in line withrehabilitation programs.
Estimated Planned Results Results 2012 2013
(in thousands of dollars)
Opening balance 17,340 15,667
Receipts 1,000 2,500
Disbursements (2,673) (1,821)
Closing balance 15,667 16,346”
“FIDUCIARY OBLIGATIONS REGARDING BUREAU OF PRISONS [Controlled since 1995]
“COMMISSARY FUND 31 U.S.C. § 1321 and its accompanying Department of Justice regulations do not impose a fiduciary obligation on the Bureau of Prisons to expend Commissary Fund moneys only in accordance with the terms of the Commissary Fund trust. May 22, 1995 MEMORANDUM FOR THE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL CIVIL DIVISION ……
Although we have established that 31 U.S.C. § 1321 and the rules set forth in Circular No. 2244 pertaining to the Commissary Fund do not impose fiduciary obligations on the BOP with respect to the Commissary Fund, we believe that 31 U.S.C. § 1321 and the rules set forth in Circular No. 2244 pertaining to the Prisoners Trust Fund do impose fiduciary obligations on the BOP with respect to moneys contained in inmates Prisoners Trust Fund accounts. We base our conclusions on distinctions between the two “trust funds.”
First, the moneys in inmates Prisoners Trust Fund accounts are truly personal funds. As stated above, each inmate’s Prisoners Trust Fund account contains money he or she brought into prison, received from a person outside the prison, or earned while in prison.(13) Accordingly, Circular No. 2244 establishes an elaborate accounting scheme to ensure that funds in inmates’ Prisoners’ Trust Fund accounts are properly credited, see id. ¶¶ 4-7,(14) and debited, see id. ¶¶ 8-10.
Second, unlike provisions of Circular No. 2244 pertaining to the commissaries and Commissary Fund, provisions pertaining to the Prisoners Trust Fund require the BOP to act in the best interest of individual inmates in managing their Prisoners Trust Fund accounts. Circular No. 2244 limits the amount of money that can be withdrawn monthly from inmates Prisoners Trust Fund accounts. However, it also provides that a prison warden may authorize larger monthly withdrawals for restitution or reparation of damages, payment of fines, remittance to a dependent in dire circumstances, books, tools or materials used for educational or vocational purposes, and payments to lawyers if the Warden deems it “necessary or for the best interest of an inmate and is satisfied that no abuse would result therefrom.” Id. ¶ 8. Circular No. 2244 also provides that “[i]n no event shall any transfer from one inmate’s account to that of another be permitted.” Id. ¶ 9. Moreover, the Circular states that while food and clothing will no longer be accepted at federal prisons for use of inmates, “money may be received and placed to the credit of the individual inmates in thePrisoners’ Trust Fund,’ to be used for their benefit in accordance with rules and regulations herein provided.” Id. ¶ 18 (emphasis added).
Third, the BOP has historically recognized fiduciary obligations with respect to inmates Prisoners Trust Fund accounts, generally refusing “to allow attachment or levy on the prisoners trust funds as inconsistent with the provisions of the trust.” Prisoners Trust Fund Memorandum at 5. In affirming the BOP’s understanding that it may not attach inmates Prisoners Trust Fund moneys to satisfy claims by the United States, this Office has stated that “[a] withdrawal of [Prisoners Trust Fund moneys] without the inmate’s consent . . . would seem to constitute a breach of the terms of the trust.” Id. at 11.
“United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
Argued March 31, 1995 Decided May 9, 1995
United States of America,
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Columbia
Michael H. Stone argued the cause and filed the briefs for appellant.
Gregory A. Gruber, Assistant U.S. Attorney, appeared pro hac vice and argued the cause for appellee. With him on the brief were Eric H. Holder, Jr., U.S. Attorney, John R. Fisher, Elizabeth Trosman and Eric B. Marcy, Assistant U.S. Attorneys [Marcy is Field McConnell’s brother –in-law].
Before: Buckley, Williams and Tatel, Circuit Judges.
Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge Williams.
Williams, Circuit Judge : Matthew Lyons was indicted for hiring an undercover police officer to murder a man he believed to be his wife’s lover. In exchange for the government’s agreement to dismiss two local-law counts and to refrain from opposing a reduction in his sentence for acceptance of responsibility, Lyons pleaded guilty to one count of violating the federal murder-for-hire statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1958 (Supp. 1992).”
Pro hac vice (IPA: [prəʊ hæk ‘vi:tʃei]), Latin: “for this occasion” or “for this event” (literally, “for this turn”), is a legal term usually referring to a lawyer who has not been admitted to practice in a certain jurisdiction but has been allowed to participate in a particular case in that jurisdiction.
“The right to appear pro hac vice is not guaranteed. Rather, the attorney wanting to practice in a jurisdiction within which he or she is not licensed must specifically request permission from the court to be able to appear as an attorney of record. This is accomplished with a motion to appear pro hac vice, in which an attorney who is licensed in the jurisdiction requests that the non‐licensed attorney be admitted to practice in a particular case.
In addition to the motion, the out-of-jurisdiction attorney is typically required to provide the court with a statement from his local bar association indicating that he is a member in good standing and also pay a small fee to the court or its local bar association (e.g. $25 per year in Delaware federal court, $200 in New York City federal court, $301 per case for Massachusetts appellate courts).
In maritime law, a demise charterer is the considered the owner pro hac vice for limited liability purposes, whereas time or voyage charterers are not.
The expression is also used in the Catholic Church when a titular diocese becomes the title of an archbishop rather than of a bishop. Similarly, when a Cardinal-Deacon is promoted to Cardinal-Priest he usually retains his titular deaconry. This deaconry is then said to be elevated pro hac vice to the rank of a titular church. When referring to a titular diocese or titular deaconry which once was elevated pro hac vice but by now has reverted to its original rank the term pro illa vice is used in church documents.”