a disbarred legal professional reinstated to regulation practice in massachusetts did not fare as properly when in search of the proper to exercise in federal district courtroom.
the u.s. district courtroom for the district of massachusetts refused to permit boston criminal defense legal professional robert a. george sr. to resume practice earlier than the federal courtroom, regulation.com reviews.
chief u.s. district judge f. dennis saylor iv wrote the june 28 opinion denying george’s bid to practice before the courtroom. george “keeps to minimize” his conduct after being convicted of seven felony counts in 2012 for cash laundering and associated crimes, saylor stated.
saylor stated the june 2012 criminal convictions “standing by myself, are profoundly troubling. he devoted the crimes solely for monetary gain; now not best became there no excuse, there have been no mitigating factors (along with teens, dependancy or mental-health problems). moreover, throughout the same length, he had did not pay any country or federal income taxes for four years.”
the unpaid federal taxes, plus hobby and penalties, amounted to extra than $563,000, saylor said. george’s unpaid state taxes were greater than $a hundred seventy five,000. george negotiated a $25,000 agreement with the inner sales carrier on his unpaid federal taxes, and he is paying $500 a month on his state taxes.
to be reinstated in such situations, an applicant “must exhibit a entire acceptance of duty and exceptional regret and rehabilitation,” saylor stated. as a substitute, george keeps to “cast tons of the blame for his criminal behavior to the impact of his busy law practice as opposed to his personal private failings. furthermore, his entire brush aside of his tax obligations, for which he has expressed no regret or regret in any respect, likewise shows a demanding lack of appreciate for the law.”
george were sentenced to 42 months in jail after his conviction for laundering money for a client who contacted the drug enforcement management and agreed to become an informant. george positioned the patron in contact with a loan dealer and took a reduce of the cash.
george turned into launched in october 2015 after serving 33 months in prison. for the duration of his reinstatement court cases, george stated he wasn’t certain why he were given stuck up in cash laundering. “i do understand this,” george said. “i in no way found it smooth to mention no to all and sundry, specially to clients.”
on the time of his arrest, george stated, he become “1000 percent immersed as much as my neck in a hectic, excessive stress, excessive profile crook protection exercise. … again then i in no way stated no. i overextended myself. i used to assume there was nothing i couldn’t do or i couldn’t accomplish. and that i thought i was—i virtually—i idea i used to be infallible. and i think i lost music of how rapid i used to be transferring and how deep i was in.”
while requested if he become entrapped, george said jurors did no longer agree with he was and he regularly occurring the decision. he doesn’t agree with he will offend again due to the fact he plans to practice “on a miles more low profile, a quiet scale,” he stated.
george attributed his failure to pay income taxes to his episodic earnings all through regulation exercise. he always filed his returns with the assist of an accountant, he said, however he “got right into a bad dependancy of paying overdue.”
saylor stated george’s reputation of duty “is grudging at quality.” george “is loose to assert that he committed the crimes due to the fact he was ‘too busy’ and ‘too negligent’ to obey the regulation. but that isn’t an expression of whole remorse, and this courtroom declines to construe it as such,” saylor wrote.
law.com spoke with george’s lawyer, thomas f. maffei, who said he and his customer “are obviously very upset.” he referred to the massachusetts ideal judicial court had readmitted george “after a lengthy intending and exam of the extensive evidence in assist of bob’s reinstatement.”
george will probably are trying to find a hearing earlier than the overall district court panel,