FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V.
STEVEN FISHMAN
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
BEFORE THE HONORABLE D. LOWELL JENSEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
(EXCERPTS FOLLOW:)
(Regarding Fishman's attempt to frame the Church of Scientology:)
THE COURT:
COULD YOU GIVE ME JUST A BRIEF DESCRIPTION
OF WHAT THE GOVERNMENT WOULD BE PREPARED TO PROVE IN THIS
MATTER, MR. DONDERO?
MR. DONDERO:
THE GOVERNMENT WOULD BE PREPARED TO
PROVE THAT MR. FISHMAN ALERTED THE FBI THAT HE HAD BEEN RECEIV-
ING THREATS FROM MEMBERS OF SCIENTOLOGY REGARDING HIS CASE
IN THIS DISTRICT; THAT THE DEFENDANT ON THE DATE IN QUESTION
CLAIMED THAT HE HAD RECEIVED A FURTHER THREAT WHICH HE TAPED AND
PROVIDED A COPY OF SAID TAPE TO THE FBI WITH A TRANSCRIPTION OF
THE RECORDING AND IN THAT PARTICULAR TAPE RECORDING THERE ARE
REPRESENTATIONS MADE WHICH SUGGEST THAT HE IS TO DO CERTAIN
THINGS TO TERMINATE PEOPLE'S INVOLVEMENT IN THE CASE. ALSO,
THIS PARTICULAR INFORMATION WAS PASSED ON TO THE FBI TO
INVESTIGATE. THE FBI DID INVESTIGATE IT AND SUBSEQUENTLY
LEARNED THAT IT WAS A MANUFACTURED PHONE CALL BETWEEN A PERSON
BY THE NAME OF SHANE JOHNSON TO THE DEFENDANT, THAT THE
DEFENDANT PAID MR. JOHNSON FOR THE MAKING OF THE PHONE CALL.
BY THE COURT:
Q: MR. FISHMAN, YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE LAW PROVIDES THAT I
COULD SENTENCE YOU TO A TERM OF FIVE YEARS IN PRISON FOR THIS
OFFENSE AND FINE YOU $250,000?
A: YES.
Q: DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?
A: YES.
(Regarding Fishman's guilty plea to mail fraud:)
[THE COURT]:
HAVE YOU [FISHMAN] BEEN THREATENED OR COMPELLED TO DO THIS
IN ANY WAY?
A: NO.
Q: ARE YOU DOING THIS VOLUNTARILY?
A: YES.
Q: AND YOU'RE AWARE OF THE CONSEQUENCES THAT COULD FLOW
FROM YOUR PLEA OF GUILTY?
A: YES, I AM.
THE COURT: MR. NURIK, IS THIS PLEA WITH YOUR CONSENT?
MR. NURIK: ABSOLUTELY.
THE COURT: THEN ARRAIGN MR. FISHMAN ON THE
INDICTMENT ON THE FIRST CASE.
THE CLERK: STEVEN FISHMAN, YOU HAVE BEEN CHARGED IN A
TWO-COUNT INDICTMENT WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY FILED IN THE SOUTHERN
DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. COUNT 1 OF THAT INDICTMENT IS A VIOLATION
OF TITLE 18 UNITED STATES CODE SECTIONS 1512 Bl AND 2,
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. WHAT IS YOUR PLEA TO THAT CHARGE,
GUILTY OR NOT GUILTY?
MR. FISHMAN: GUILTY.
(The judge sentences Fishman for mail fraud and obstruction of
justice:)
[THE COURT]:
BUT IN TERMS OF WHAT SENTENCES OUGHT TO BE IMPOSED I
THINK MR. DONDERO IS CORRECT. THESE ARE VERY SERIOUS OFFENSES.
I'VE SAID THAT BEFORE AND I THINK IT'S OBVIOUS TO ANYONE THESE
ARE OFFENSES CARRIED OVER A PERIOD OF TIME. THERE'S MULTIPLE
VICTIMS. THERE IS CHOICE AFTER CHOICE AFTER CHOICE TO COMMIT
CRIMES, AND THEY DO THREATEN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM ITSELF. SO THAT
THE OFFENSES MERIT SEVERE PUNISHMENT. AND ONE OF THE PURPOSES
OF SENTENCING IS TO PUNISH, AND THAT IS ONE OF MY PURPOSES IS TO
SEE THAT PROPER PUNISHMENT IS IMPOSED IN THIS CASE.
.....
[THE COURT]: THE DEFENDANT IS HEREBY COMMITTED TO THE CUSTODY
OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, OR ITS AUTHORIZED
REPRESENTATIVE, FOR IMPRISONMENT FOR A TERM OF FIVE YEARS ON
COUNT 11 OF THE INDICTMENT, AND THAT THE DEFENDANT SHALL BECOME
ELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE UNDER 18 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 4205 (A)
UPON SERVING ONE THIRD OF SUCH TERM, AND IT'S ORDERED THAT THE
SENTENCE ON COUNT 11 SHALL RUN CONCURRENT WITH COUNT 8.
ON THE INDICTMENT CHARGING OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE THE
DEFENDANT IS SENTENCED PURSUANT TO THE SENTENCING FORMAT OF
1984. IT'S THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT THAT THE DEFENDANT IS
HEREBY COMMITTED TO THE CUSTODY OF THE BUREAU OF PRISONS TO BE
IMPRISONED FOR A TERM OF SIX MONTHS. UPON RELEASE FROM THE
IMPRISONMENT — AND THE IMPRISONMENT IN THIS CASE WILL BE
CONCURRENT WITH THE TIME IMPOSED UNDER INDICTMENT 88 0166 — HE
WILL SERVE HIS TIME ON THE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE COUNT
CONCURRENTLY. BUT HE WILL BE RELEASED FROM IMPRISONMENT AFTER
THE TOTAL TIME SERVED, AND UPON HIS RELEASE FROM PRISON THE
DEFENDANT SHALL BE PLACED ON SUPERVISED RELEASE FOR A TERM OF
TWO YEARS.
DOCKET NO. CR 88 0616
DLJ CR 90 0357 DLJ
PLAINTIFF
DEFENDANT.
JULY 20, 1990