Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
Print Edition
Classifieds
Stories
Events
Contests
Music
Movies
Theater
Food
Life Events
Cannabis
April 24, 2024
April 17, 2024
April 10, 2024
April 2, 2024
March 27, 2024
March 20, 2024
March 13, 2024
March 6, 2024
February 28, 2024
February 21, 2024
February 14, 2024
February 7, 2024
Close
April 24, 2024
April 17, 2024
April 10, 2024
April 2, 2024
March 27, 2024
March 20, 2024
March 13, 2024
March 6, 2024
February 28, 2024
February 21, 2024
February 14, 2024
February 7, 2024
April 24, 2024
April 17, 2024
April 10, 2024
April 2, 2024
March 27, 2024
March 20, 2024
March 13, 2024
March 6, 2024
February 28, 2024
February 21, 2024
February 14, 2024
February 7, 2024
Close
Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
Less than two years for swiping $1 million
As a caveat/correction to the statement in my aforementioned email "She also purchased client gifts, often had to "look the other way" with unscrupulous practices for "certain clients, and sat amidst the middle of money streams as a signatory", I change the statement as follows "She also purchased client gifts, knew of specific practices for certain clients, and sat amidst the middle of money streams as a signatory".— August 30, 2015 7:43 a.m.
Less than two years for swiping $1 million
Twister: I more than understand the process. It's easy to discuss semantics here on the Reader. The overarching issue is what forum is really most appropriate to convey such examinations and analysis. Invesitigative reporting or a book. We're opting for a book. And itsa gonna be a whammy!!!— August 29, 2015 7:41 p.m.
Less than two years for swiping $1 million
Don: The prosecutors knew what they were doing in that they intentionally biased their presentation (by deleting key spreadsheet tabs and others) to maximize the defendants damages because thats what they do…exacerbate their case/position. But to disparagely do so while putting someone's very life and existence on the federal chopping block as they have is reprehensible and goes well beyond both legal ethics and moral code. I for one am appalled at their audacity.— August 29, 2015 7:37 p.m.
Less than two years for swiping $1 million
Don: Counsel extremely competent and well known. He did suggest that she plead given there was bias on the part of the fed as to what they would include, consider, and not investigate. As mentioned, the cost of going to trial was significant as was the concern of a much longer long minimum trial sentence. He did look at the evidence that the prosecution ignored and said evidence was submitted as objections at sentencing.— August 28, 2015 9:46 p.m.
Less than two years for swiping $1 million
Tw: Completely understand. Justice is painfully slow. As far as sources and evidence…you mean like subpoenaed accounting speadsheets that show completed payments, other approver names within the corporate financial accounting system, things like this that were blatantly not investigated by the fed?? They are part of the case file and Ms. Coulman has copies as well.— August 28, 2015 9:37 p.m.
Less than two years for swiping $1 million
They are part of the case file.— August 28, 2015 9:26 p.m.
Less than two years for swiping $1 million
Ms. Coulman's— August 28, 2015 9:25 p.m.
Less than two years for swiping $1 million
I caveat the following "She was part of an internal process that required her to often look the other way and given her name was on the transactions as one of the signatories, she was nailed for everything as other upper echelons bailed and left her holding the bag" to "She was part of an internal process that required her to often look the other way and given her name was on the transactions as one of the signatories, she was nailed by the prosecution for everything as other echelons had left. I caveat the following: "Reason being because of the many solid objections that the defense raised regarding the prosecution flatly ignoring evidence provided of others that were directly complicit in the overall financial mismanagement that they stuck her alone for" to "Reason being because of the many solid objections that the defense raised regarding the prosecution flatly ignoring evidence provided of others in the financial process that the prosecution stuck her alone for".— August 27, 2015 6:45 p.m.
Less than two years for swiping $1 million
Don: The judge couldn't find her not guilty because she pled guilty under a plea over a year ago based on the aforementioned reasons. This was not a trial but a sentencing hearing and in federal court, both prosecutorial and defense evidence is submitted to the judge to assist him in passing sentence. No probation here either given the 954K damages. But I'd like to make something clear here. As you mention above, I never said that she aided any fellow employees in their own swindles or that there was any active scapegoating by HP against her. What I've said and caveated from the beginning is that folks left and the names of her other colleagues in her financial approval chain as well as accounting spreadsheets which accounted for the money spent on the various corporate functions she coordinated were provided as defense evidence and were not apparently investigated or considered pre-sentence, hence the defense objections that are part of the case file. The judge had to pass sentence based on the guilty plea and the amount embezzled but did apparently take the copious defense objections into account given he passed a "light" sentence. As you said, that's interesting.— August 27, 2015 6:09 p.m.
Less than two years for swiping $1 million
Twister: Her lawyer already did just that. They were submitted as objections to the way the case was investigated.— August 27, 2015 2:28 p.m.