|  | ||||||||||
|  | ||||||||||
| 
     You may click on the headlines to go to the story or scroll---      Headlines---               “Fin 
          Pac” IPO “in a few weeks”                 Industry 
          Leader Ron Caruso on “ SILO”     Hansabank 
          to Expand Russian Operation         Exchange 
          Rate: Europe Should Be Buying U.S.              Business 
          Leasing News May Edition                 Atlas 
          America Completes Public Offering                     Doug 
          Cain joins GMAC Equip. Finance                         Donna 
          M. Wesemann Sales Manager     Ameritrans 
          Reports Loss Fiscal Year 2004 3rd Q         Jetworks 
          Formed by Industry Veteran             Charter 
          One New Healthcare Finance Initiative     ########  surrounding the article denotes it is a “press 
          release”   -------------------------------------------------------------------------------     Classified 
          Ads---Credit   Credit: Atlanta, 
          GA. VP Credit/Operations/Sr. Credit Officer. 15yrs exp. in equipment 
          leasing. Strong financial analysis and management skills. Experience 
          developing and maintaining profitable customer/vendor relationships. 
          Email:credops@msn.com   Credit: Atlanta, 
          GA. Senior Credit Officer 
          in middle-market equip. finance, vendor, 3rd party, specialty, flow 
          credit to the fortune 1000. Team builder, originations capable, strong 
          work ethic, ability to multi-task. Email: kyletrust@hotmail.com      Credit: Atlanta, 
          GA. 10 yrs experience 
          in credit/collections/recovery/documentation 
          in the leasing industry. P&L responsibility, team builder & 
          strong portfolio mgnt skills. email: mortimerga@adelphia.net   Credit: Boston 
          Ma. Challenging position 
          where my skills, professional experience, organization, leadership, 
          strategic thinking, creativity, energy, passion, competitive nature 
          will enable me to define opportunities and personal development. Email: 
          bernd.janet@verizon.net   Credit: Corona, 
          CA. VP credit Consumer 
          Credit prime/sub prime Auto lending/leasing/mortgages. 20+yrs exp. If 
          you are looking for someone to affect the bottom line I am that person. 
          Will relocate. Email:amosca2000@yahoo.com        Credit: Danbury, 
          CT. Skilled in team building, management & training.Seasoned credit, portfolio and risk management professional. Experienced in developing, implementing underwriting, portfolio management policies & procedures. email: vgjmoro@aol.com   Credit/Documentation: 
          Fort Lee NJ 3 Years Experience. 
          Looking in NJ/NY. Email: angitravis@mail.com      Credit: Long 
          Beach, NY. Credit officer w/more than 20 years of 
          experience. Seeking position in which I can utilize my credit-collections, 
          communication &management skills. Email:michaelschaubeck@webtv.net         Credit: Los 
          Angeles, CA Over 15 years experience 
          in Credit/Operations with Small Ticket and transactions up to $500,000.00. 
          CLP, with excellent relationships with most major lenders. Email:jonbh123@earthlink.net     Credit: Mill 
          Valley, CA Senior corporate 
          officer with financial services credit background. M and A, fund raising 
          and workout expertise. Email:nywb@aol.com         Credit: New 
          Jersey, NJ Credit Analyst with 
          10+ years experience in small-ticket lending up to $500,000. Experience 
          with both vendor-direct and with brokers. Email: b.leavy@worldnet.att.net   Credit: New 
          York, NY 3+ years of leasing 
          credit / contracts experience. Currently in the leasing industry and 
          moving to NY! Exp. working at both funding source and broker. Email: lease4you@mail.com       Credit: New 
          York, NY. V.P. Credit & 
          Collections w/23 years exp.looking for a situation where I can utilize 
          my varied & extensive knowledge of credit/ collections/risk-management 
          & leasing. Email:rcouzzi@yahoo.com   Credit: New 
          York, NY Credit officer with banking and leasing background; strong 
          analytical and communication/PC skills with lending and portfolio management 
          experience. Email: michaelschaubeck@webtv.net      Credit: Phoenix, 
          AZ. Credit/Leasing Manager- 
          8 years underwriting. Proven performer,strong negotiator and sales support. 
          Worked with the best- Randy Schiell, Chuck Brazier, Jim Lahti. Contact: Elizabeth 
          Rose (480)510-7434  Email: ravenfinance@aol.com   Credit: San 
          Francisco, CA. 10+ years Credit Analyst experience underwriting for 
          a direct lessor, regional bank and vendor leasing company. Have CLP 
          and will make decisions  ( won't rely on a FICO score for enlightenment.) Email: pmtorres1@yahoo.com   Credit Manager: 
          Westlake, OH 7+ years Credit/Underwriting experience Comp lit. Please email me for copy of job description at        full list of all classified “Job Wanted” ads at:         http://64.125.68.90/LeasingNews/JobPostings.htm      We Help You Find Jobs and have many testimonials.  “Free”                                          http://64.125.68.90/LeasingNews/PostingForm.asp           ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------     Economic 
          Events This Week     May 19 Wednesday Balance of Trade: 
          March Federal Budget: April   May 20 Thursday Producer Prices: 
          April Retail Sales: April Weekly Jobless Claims 
 May 21 Friday Inventory-Sales Ratio: 
          March Capacity Use: April Consumer Price Index: 
          April 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- “Fin 
          Pac” IPO “in a few weeks”   The 
          $80.50 Financial Pacific Leasing IPO offering will be “ in a few weeks, 
          as soon as it received SEC clearance, “ according to a spokesperson 
          for Piper Jaffray , 800 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402, 
          or by telephone at 800-333-6000 , one of the agents where you may obtain 
          a prospectus.   Located 
          in Federal Way, close to Tacoma, Washington, the company known in the 
          trade as “Fin Pac,” has a unique market place with over 450 broker nationwide 
          in the small ticket market place, specializing in unusual equipment, 
          situations such as working from your home, and not seeking direct or 
          vendor business.   A 
          full story is available at:   http://www.leasingnews.org/Conscious-Top%20Stories/Fin_pac_prosp_avail.htm Accounting 
 
   Industry Leader Ron Caruso on “ SILO”     By:  Ron Caruso, Equipment Finance Journal   For a period of time, 
          the leasing industry has been in the sights of Congress. We have been 
          painted with the same brush used to tar and feather the likes of Tyco, 
          WorldCom, Enron, et.al.  Not 
          the type of company your mother would like you to be keeping. We’ve 
          been branded as the purveyors of scam transactions that rip off the 
          U.S. taxpayer. With the fury of the righteous, Congress is about to 
          take action vowing to put an end to all of this so-called abuse.  
             Just coincidentally, 
          they are also attempting to enact a new budget. Unfortunately, every 
          time they add up the amount they project for revenues, it falls short  (far short) of the amount they project for 
          expenditures. What can they do?  Well, 
          they can look for additional sources of revenue, such as closing the 
          so-called loopholes that were used by the leasing industry. By doing 
          this, they will prevent the continued abuse (in their eyes) perpetrated 
          by certain members of the leasing fraternity, perhaps even allow certain 
          provisos to be retroactive to punish the offenders and generate the 
          additional revenue they need. Sounds like a win-win proposition, right? 
          Well, not exactly.    To begin with, the 
          invective hurled at the leasing industry and the characterizations (ENRON-like,etc.) 
          are without merit. True, there were some uses of the tax code that caused 
          indignation, especially when applied to assets used by foreign municipalities, 
          but now “owned” for tax purposes by U.S. corporations, resulting in 
          U.S. tax benefits. However, unlike the companies mentioned above, no 
          crimes were committed, and no indictments were issued. Is this distinction 
          too subtle?     The reality is the 
          tax code was stretched and if Congress has a problem with that, the 
          answer is all too obvious: change the tax code. But in doing that be 
          careful you don’t kill the golden goose, or in this case, our still 
          recovering economy. The measures being considered by Congress to curb 
          this abuse and punish the abusers range from significant to draconian. 
          It’s time to get off the soap box, calm down and think and act with 
          a little more detachment.    Big ticket leasing 
          has helped a number of companies and municipalities and provided a significant 
          lift to our economy. Lessors in this market segment have taken their 
          lumps as well. All one has to do is look at all the airplanes parked 
          in the desert to appreciate this. It can continue to provide a significant 
          amount of financing for new equipment.   
          This is important, given where the economy is currently, and 
          where new capital expenditures are not. Yes, business is increasing 
          its expenditures for IT and related hardware/software. But new investment 
          in other types of equipment is still lagging. At a stage when corporate 
          profits are rebounding, consumers continue to spend and employment is 
          on an up tick, caution must be exercised.     What 
          is vital at this time is leadership from our government. Someone needs 
          to be the voice of reason and detachment, and bring the disparate parties 
          together, to work together, to find a solution that benefits all. Will 
          this happen? Well until the shouting dies down, such a voice has little 
          chance of being heard. Stay tuned.     ( to subscribe, please go to: www.efj.com  ) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gym 
          Leasing Ponzi Scheme   Minnesota Attorney 
          General Mike Hatch has accused Cameron J. Lewis  
          of operating a pyramid scheme by using money from newly enlisted 
          schools - not grants or donations - to make token reimbursements to 
          schools that signed up early to buy or lease fitness equipment. Many 
          of the schools were left unable to pay off bank loans or satisfy leasing 
          terms.   600 schools in 20 
          states reportedly bought $77.5 million worth of weight machines, treadmills 
          and other equipment with much of it leased from various 
          leasing companies.   Cameron set up a 
          foundation with the promise that private donations or government grants 
          would cover the cost of the equipment or the lease payments.     Chris Essman, treasurer 
          for Bexley City Schools in Ohio says the school district has received 
          $70,000 in reimbursements. It still owes over $140,000 in lease payments 
          on the equipment.   An investigation 
          by The Associated Press reveals Lewis has had a string of failed businesses, 
          a history of personal bankruptcy and used his nonprofit foundation to 
          give himself a $317,358 salary.   According to AP, 
          Lewis makes for an unlikely philanthropist; he claims to have poured 
          $1.6 million of his own money into the foundation. But when filing for 
          bankruptcy in 1996, he listed $6,840 in assets, including a six-year-old 
          Isuzi truck and an electric guitar, with nearly $20,000 in liabilities.   Tax returns for the 
          National School Fitness Foundation reportedly show Lewis was collecting 
          a $317,358 salary, but he claims that salary covered the foundation's 
          first two years. He said his present income from the foundation 
          is $185,000 per year plus expenses.   Francine Giani, director 
          of Utah's Consumer Protection Division, is    Utah schools have 
          filed no complaints, ``which makes our job a little more tasking,'' 
          she added.   Lewis, meanwhile, 
          told the Associated Press he was committed to improving the lives of 
          overweight school kids by providing exercise machines and a training 
          regimen.   ``The sad thing is 
          that many kids are obese and the likelihood they can get past that in 
          adolescence is slim to none. It's a sad, sad fact,'' he told AP. ``Here 
          we've got a program that really works.''   On the Net:   National School Fitness 
          Foundation: http://www.nsff.net -------------------------------------------------------------------------- RW 
          Professional Up-Date      4/6/04 all counsel 
          to agree on jurors who will return for Jury Selection. Jury Selection 
          4/12/04 @ 9:00 a.m. Consent to Magistrate Judge selecting jury by dfts 
          and govt. No adjournments of Jury Selection date will be granted     WestLaw   United States District 
          Court, E.D. New York. UNITED STATES of 
          America, v. RW PROFESSIONAL LEASING 
          SERVICES CORP., also known as "Professional Leasing Services," 
          Rochelle Besser, also known as "Rochelle Drayer," Barry Drayer, 
          Roger Drayer, Adam Drayer, Susan Cottrell, Myrna Katz, and Stephen Barker, 
          Defendants. No. 02 CV 767(ADS)(MLO). May 4, 2004.   Background: Defendants 
          were charged with conspiracy to commit bank fraud and wire fraud and 
          money laundering. Defendants filed various pretrial motions.    Holdings: The District 
          Court, Spatt, J., held that:  (1) defendants were 
          entitled to suppression hearing on claim that third           party acted as government agent in seizing items;  (2) defendant was 
          entitled to hearing on claim that officers coerced        statements by threatening to arrest members of his family;  (3) defendant invoked 
          Fifth Amendment right to counsel;  (4) Bruton did not 
          require exclusion of statements at joint trial;  (5) evidence relating 
          to acts of alleged co-conspirator was relevant to        conspiracy counts;  (6) defendant was 
          not entitled to severance of trials; and  (7) defendants were 
          not entitled to bill of particulars.         Motions granted in part and denied in part.   In prosecution for 
          conspiracies to commit bank and wire fraud and to launder money, which 
          involved obtaining loans under false pretenses from bank, defendants 
          would not be granted bill of particulars detailing which allegedly fraudulent 
          schemes corresponded to which loans, explaining how loss figures were 
          calculated, or stating where proceeds of each loan were secreted, as 
          such level of detail was neither required nor necessary to prepare defense. 
          Fed.Rules Cr.Proc.Rule 7(f), 18 U.S.C.A.   [32]   110 Criminal Law 110XX Trial 110XX(A) Preliminary 
          Proceedings 110k627.5 Discovery 
          Prior to and Incident to Trial 110k627.7 Statements, 
          Disclosure of 110k627.7(3) k. Statements 
          of Witnesses or Prospective Witnesses. Most Cited Cases   Government's representation 
          that it would produce statements of all prospective witnesses three 
          days before trial was sufficient to satisfy its obligation to produce 
          statements that it intended to use at trial or were relevant to defense, 
          such that pretrial request to compel production would be denied. Fed.Rules 
          Cr.Proc.Rule 16(a)(1), 18 U.S.C.A.   MEMORANDUM OF DECISION 
          AND ORDER   SPATT, District Judge. *1 This case involves 
          charges of conspiracy to commit bank fraud and wire fraud and money 
          laundering. Presently before the Court are the following motions by 
          RW Professional Leasing Services, Corp. ("PLS"), Rochelle 
          Besser, Barry Drayer, Roger Drayer, Adam Drayer, Susan Cottrell, and 
          Stephen Barker (collectively, the "defendants"): (1) to suppress 
          documents obtained directly by a confidential source referred to as 
          "CS-1" in the Government's search warrant application, and 
          any evidence seized by the Government from PLS's office; (2) to suppress 
          Roger Drayer's post-arrest statements; (3) to preclude evidence concerning 
          the alleged fraudulent loans obtained by PLS on behalf of Hospitality 
          Services of Middle Tennessee ("HSMT"); (4) to dismiss the 
          indictment with respect to defendant Adam Drayer, or alternatively, 
          to sever his trial; (5) for the production of all Brady and Giglio materials; 
          (6) for an order directing the Government to provide a bill of particulars; 
          and (7) for an order directing the Government to provide statements 
          and the grand jury testimony of PLS employees. I. BACKGROUND On or about April 
          2, 2003, along with Payaddi Shivashankar, the defendants were indicted 
          and charged with one count of conspiracy to commit bank fraud and wire 
          fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 371, five counts of bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1344, 
          and one count of money laundering, 18 U.S.C. § 1986(h). The following 
          facts are taken from the superseding indictment ("indictment"). 
          PLS maintained business locations in Island Park, New York, and Wellesley, 
          Massachusetts. The indictment charges, in relevant part, that Rochelle 
          Besser, Barry Drayer, Susan Cottrell, Roger Drayer, and Roger Drayer's 
          son Adam Drayer (collectively, the "PLS defendants") operated 
          a medical equipment financing company, in which they arranged financing 
          for the leasing of medical equipment by medical providers and supplied 
          medical providers with working capital loans. PLS obtained loans from 
          financial institutions for the purported purpose of purchasing medical 
          equipment that would be leased to medical providers. In many instances, 
          the leases and the medical equipment served as collateral for the loans. The indictment charges 
          that PLS devised a scheme to provide the financial institutions with 
          sham documentation creating the false impression that the medical providers 
          were leasing equipment from PLS and that PLS issued phony equipment 
          invoices directly to the medical providers for payments due under the 
          lease. The indictment further charges that the PLS defendants, among 
          other things: (1) intentionally retained lease prepayments, rather than 
          remitting them to the financial institutions; (2) concealed prepayments 
          and defaults by medical providers by creating false checks that were 
          designed to make it appear as though the medical providers were continuing 
          to make payments under the leases; (3) fraudulently induced lenders 
          to fund multiple loans on the basis of a single lease; (4) obtained 
          loans from lenders on the basis of leases that had been cancelled by 
          medical providers; (5) presented escrow agreements to banks to induce 
          them to fund loans, knowing that escrow accounts would not be established 
          and no funds would be held in escrow for the banks; and (6) converted 
          loan proceeds to PLS's own use. *2 The indictment 
          provides that, instead of establishing escrow accounts for the leases 
          being financed by the financial institutions as required by the escrow 
          agreements, PLS maintained one bank account that received approximately 
          $92 million in loan proceeds wired by the lending institutions, and 
          a second bank account known as the "E-Account," which was 
          used by PLS as an operating account to receive lease payments and lease 
          prepayments from the medical providers and for other purposes. The bank 
          account and the E-Account were maintained by PLS at the same financial 
          institution. After the loan proceeds 
          were wired into the first account, they were transferred by PLS into 
          the E-Account, where they were commingled with lease payments and lease 
          prepayments. Instead of using the loan proceeds for the purchase of 
          medical equipment, as PLS had promised to do, the PLS defendants converted 
          a substantial portion of the loan proceeds to their own uses. In particular, 
          the commingled funds were transferred by check or wire from the E- Account 
          to (1) pay financial obligations of PLS; (2) make lease payments in 
          order to conceal the medical providers' default status from lenders; 
          and (3) another account maintained by PLS in order to disguise the proceeds 
          and facilitate their conversions. The indictment states that the PLS 
          defendants fraudulently converted at least the sum of $28 million. II. DISCUSSION A. Motion to Suppress 
          all Evidence obtained by "CS-1" The defendants identify 
          a confidential source ("CS-1") as former PLS employee Frank 
          Zambaras. They argue that Zambaras acted as a de facto Government agent 
          and that, therefore, all items seized by him and all evidence derived 
          from those items, including items seized pursuant to the search warrant, 
          should be suppressed. Alternatively, the defendants request an evidentiary 
          hearing to determine whether Zambaras acted as a Government instrument 
          or agent. [1][2] The Fourth 
          Amendment provides that "the right of the people to be secure in 
          their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches 
          and seizures, shall not be violated...." U.S. Const. amend. IV. 
          It is well-settled that the "surreptitious search of premises by 
          a private party does not violate the Fourth Amendment" unless such 
          individual is acting as an instrument or agent of the government in 
          obtaining evidence. United States v. Bennett, 709 F.2d 803, 805 (2d 
          Cir.1983). The Supreme Court has made clear that it is " 'immaterial' 
          whether the government originated the idea for a search or joined it 
          while it was in progress." United States v. Knoll, 16 F.3d 1313, 
          1320 (2d Cir.1994) (quoting Lustig v. United States, 338 U.S. 74, 78-79, 
          69 S.Ct. 1372, 93 L.Ed. 1819 (1949)). If the government " 'was 
          in it before the object of the search was completely accomplished [by 
          the private party, it] must be deemed to have participated in it .' 
          " Id. (quoting Lustig, 338 U.S. at 78-79)). Thus, the critical 
          issue is "the point in time when the object of the search has been 
          completed. If the object has been realized, the government cannot later 
          become a party to it. By the same token, it may not expand the scope 
          of an ongoing private search unless it has an independent right to do 
          so." Id. *3 An evidentiary 
          hearing on a motion to suppress "ordinarily is required if the 
          moving papers are sufficiently definite, specific, and nonconjectural 
          to enable the court to conclude that contested issues of fact going 
          to the validity of the search are in question." United States v. 
          Pena, 961 F.2d 333, 339 (2d Cir.1992) (citations and quotations omitted). 
          A defendant seeking a hearing on a suppression motion bears the burden 
          of showing the existence of disputed issues of material fact. See id. 
          at 338. However, a district court is not required to hold an evidentiary 
          hearing if the defendant's "moving papers did not state sufficient 
          facts which, if proven, would have required the granting of the relief 
          requested." United States v. Culotta, 413 F.2d 1343, 1349 (2d Cir.1969). 
          Further, a court need not hold an evidentiary hearing when the "defendant's 
          allegations are general and conclusory or are based on suspicion and 
          conjecture." United States v. Wallace, No. 97 CR 975, 1998 WL 10874, 
          at *30 (S.D.N.Y. July 17, 1998) (citation omitted). [3] According to 
          the defendants, the circumstances surrounding the recovery of items 
          by Zambaras from the PLS office "lead to the conclusion that the 
          FBI directed or at least encouraged the actions of Zambaras in his surreptitious 
          search and seizure of such items." The defendants point out that, 
          in a June 20, 2002 complaint and affidavit, Agent Rondie Peiscop-Grau 
          stated that Zambaras "has been supplying the [Government] with 
          information and documents" about PLS's operation since on or about 
          June 13, 2002. Agent Peiscop-Grau further stated that Zambaras provided 
          a file "relating to OD-1, an optometrist from California" 
          and "four other files reflecting the defendants' rental of boxes 
          from Mail Boxes, Etc." In addition, the 
          defendants assert that a photocopy of a property receipt reveals that 
          Zambaras provided several items to the Government on June 18, 2002, 
          three days prior to the arrest of Barry Drayer, Rochelle Besser and 
          Roger Drayer. The defendants also contend that a photocopy of a computer 
          disk appears to show that, at some point, Zambaras provided the Government 
          with an actual computer disk containing copies of RW checks. The defendants 
          state that this disk was not generated by any of the PLS defendants. 
          Based on this, the defendants contend that the computer disk and the 
          other documents were seized by Zambaras without PLS's authorization 
          and with the knowledge of the Government. Further, the defendants 
          state that, on or about June 13, 2002, Zambaras was terminated by PLS. 
          Several days later, when Zambaras was no longer on the payroll, several 
          PLS employees observed him at the PLS office making an "unusual" 
          number of photocopies. In an April 1, 2004 supplemental affidavit, Roger 
          Drayer states that he saw Zambaras at the photocopy machine for "several 
          hours." According to the defendants, Zambaras was copying and stealing 
          PLS files. Further, in a February 12, 2004 affidavit, Domenica Califano, 
          another tenant in the building in which PLS is located, asserts that 
          Zambaras was observed on June 21, 2002 handing the FBI agents a computer 
          disk and accompanying FBI agents, while a search warrant was being executed 
          inside the PLS office. *4 In response, the 
          Government contends that there is nothing in Agent Rondie-Grau's affidavit 
          to suggest when, where, or how the documents supplied by Zambaras were 
          obtained. The Government further contends that there is no evidence 
          that the FBI directed or approved a private search of PLS's office. In the Court's view, 
          the defendants have made a sufficient showing that contested issues 
          of fact exist regarding whether Zambaras was working on behalf of the 
          Government at the time he obtained documents. In sum, the defendants 
          contend that Zambaras was acting at the behest of the Government, based 
          on the following: (1) the language in the affidavit of Agent Peiscop-Grau 
          reveals that Zambaras provided the Government with information and documents 
          in the week preceding the search of the PLS office on June 21, 2002; 
          (2) Roger Drayer's observation regarding the "unusual amount" 
          of photocopying by Zambaras after the FBI met with him on June 13, 2002; 
          (3) the FBI receipt indicating Zambaras gave documents to Agent Peiscop-Grau 
          on June 18, 2002; (4) the copy of the computer disk that had "PLS 
          Checks" written upon it but was not generated by any of the PLS 
          defendants; and (5) the observations of an independent third- party 
          witness that Zambaras was actually assisting the FBI in the execution 
          of the search warrant. Based on these allegations, the Court finds that 
          an evidentiary hearing is necessary to determine whether there was Government 
          involvement in Zambaras's seizure of the documents. Accordingly, United 
          States Magistrate Judge Michael L. Orenstein is requested to conduct 
          a suppression hearing with regard to this issue at his earliest convenience 
          and report to the Court. The Court will defer its decision on this motion 
          until after the determination of the suppression hearing. B. The Motion to 
          Suppress Roger Drayer's Post-Arrest Statement 1. As to Voluntariness The defendants moves 
          to suppress Roger Drayer's post-arrest statements made on June 21, 2002, 
          to FBI Agents Vincent Gerardi and Michael Lender, which were memorialized 
          by the agents in an FBI form 302. The defendants argue that his statements 
          should be suppressed on the grounds that (1) they were involuntary; 
          (2) they were obtained in violation of his Fifth Amendment right to 
          counsel; and (3) admitting the statements would violate the Bruton rule. [4] The Fifth Amendment 
          right against self-incrimination requires a court to exclude from criminal 
          proceedings involuntary statements produced by government threats or 
          coercion. Green v. Scully, 850 F.2d 894, 900 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 
          488 U.S. 945, 109 S.Ct. 374, 102 L.Ed.2d 363 (1988). Because custodial 
          interrogation is inherently coercive, see Dickerson v. United States, 
          530 U.S. 428, 435, 120 S.Ct. 2326, 147 L.Ed.2d 405 (2000), law enforcement 
          officers must provide a suspect with Miranda warnings prior to interrogation 
          to safeguard a defendant's privilege against self incrimination. United 
          States v. Ramirez, 79 F.3d 298, 304 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 
          850, 117 S.Ct. 140, 136 L.Ed.2d 87 (1996). Interrogation "refers 
          not only to express questioning, but also to any words or actions on 
          the part of the police (other than those normally attendant to arrest 
          and custody) that the police should know are reasonably likely to elicit 
          an incriminating response from the suspect." Rhode Island v. Innis, 
          446 U.S. 291, 301, 100 S.Ct. 1682, 64 L.Ed.2d 297 (1980). *5 [5] To determine 
          whether a defendant waived his Fifth Amendment rights, the Court must 
          decide whether the waiver was made with the "full awareness of 
          the right being waived and of the consequences of waiving that right," 
          United States v. Jaswal, 47 F.3d 539, 542 (2d Cir.1995), and whether 
          the confession or statement was the "product of a free and deliberate 
          choice rather than intimidation, coercion, or deception," Moran 
          v. Burbine, 475 U.S. 412, 421, 106 S.Ct. 1135, 89 L.Ed.2d 410 (1986). 
          A defendant's confession or statement "must not be extracted by 
          any sort of threats or violence, nor obtained by any direct or implied 
          promises, however slight, nor by the exertion by any improper influence." 
          Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1, 7, 84 S.Ct. 1489, 12 L.Ed.2d 653 (1964). 
          Coercion may be found where a defendant's statement is "obtained 
          under circumstances that overbear the defendant's will at the time it 
          is given...." United States v. Anderson, 926 F.2d 96, 99 (2d Cir.1999). 
          Whether a statement is voluntarily made or a product of government coercion 
          depends on the totality of the circumstances. United States v. Gaines, 
          295 F.3d 293, 298 (2d Cir.2002) (citing Tankleff v. Senkowski, 135 F.3d 
          235, 244-45 (2d Cir.1998)). [6] Promises of leniency, 
          without more, do not invalidate a Miranda waiver. See United States 
          v. Guarno, 819 F.2d 28, 31 (2d Cir.1987). Although material misrepresentations 
          based on unfulfillable or other improper promises might overbear a defendant's 
          will, see United States v. Ruggles, 70 F.3d 262, 265 (2d Cir.1995), 
          "a confession is not involuntary merely because the suspect was 
          promised leniency if he cooperated with law enforcement officials.' 
          " United States v. Bye, 919 F.2d 6, 9 (2d Cir.1990) (quoting Guarno, 
          819 F.2d at 31)). Thus, whether promises of leniency for his children 
          overbore the defendant's will in this case, thereby rendering his waiver 
          involuntary, depends on the promises made. [7] In the present 
          case, the defendants apparently concede that Miranda warnings were given. 
          Rather, the defendants contend that Roger Drayer's statements to the 
          FBI agents were involuntary. As noted above, one of the factors the 
          Court must consider when determining whether a statement was voluntarily 
          made is whether the government agents know that their conduct is reasonably 
          likely to elicit an incriminating response from the suspect. Rhode Island, 
          446 U.S. at 301. According to the 
          defendants, when Roger Drayer was arrested, FBI agents handcuffed him 
          in front of his son, Adam Drayer, and warned Adam "you too are 
          a hair away from being arrested." Shortly thereafter, the agents 
          informed Roger Drayer that his daughter, Jennifer Tarantino, was also 
          going to be arrested that day. He was then transported to FBI headquarters 
          where he indicated that he would need an attorney. Before an attorney 
          was provided, the defendants contend that one of the FBI agents "implied" 
          that his children Adam Drayer and Jennifer Tarantino would go to jail 
          if he did not make a statement and tell them about PLS's operation. 
          Based on these circumstances, the defendants contend that Roger Drayer 
          was coerced to make a statement because of concern for his children. *6 In response, the 
          Government denies that Roger Drayer's statement was the product of coercion. 
          Any statements made to Roger Drayer by the FBI, asserts the Government, 
          were in the nature of permissible and truthful advice concerning his 
          post-arrest circumstances. [8][9] The Court 
          finds that disputed issues of fact exist regarding the circumstances 
          in which the Government obtained Roger Drayer's statements. A defendant's 
          statement that is induced by government threats to arrest members of 
          the suspect's family may render his statement involuntary. See, e.g., 
          Rogers v. Richmond, 365 U.S. 534, 544-48, 81 S.Ct. 735, 5 L.Ed.2d 760 
          (1961) (finding that a confession was coerced because the defendant 
          was told his wife would be taken in for questioning). In the Court's 
          view, the defendants have advanced enough facts to demonstrate that 
          disputed issues of fact exist regarding whether the agents exercised 
          undue psychological pressure on Roger Drayer so that his will was overcome 
          at the time he made his statements, thereby rendering his statements 
          involuntary. Because the parties dispute the circumstances surrounding 
          Roger Drayer's statements, the Court concludes that it cannot decide 
          the defendants' motion to suppress Roger Drayer's statements without 
          an evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, United States Magistrate Judge 
          Michael L. Orenstein is requested to conduct a suppression hearing and 
          report to the Court with regard to the issue of voluntariness. 2. As to his Invocation 
          of his Right to Counsel Next, the defendants 
          argue that the statements by Roger Drayer should be suppressed because 
          they were elicited after he invoked his right to counsel. After Roger 
          Drayer was arrested, he was placed in an FBI vehicle and driven to FBI 
          headquarters. During the drive, one of the agents asked him if he had 
          an attorney, to which he responded that he "would want an attorney 
          appointed to me." According to the defendants, this amounted to 
          a Fifth Amendment invocation of counsel under Edwards v. Arizona, 451 
          U.S. 477, 484-85, 101 S.Ct. 1880, 68 L.Ed.2d 378 (1981), [10][11] It is well-settled 
          that a Sixth Amendment right to counsel attaches only at or after the 
          time that adversary judicial proceedings have been initiated against 
          the suspect, " 'whether by way of formal charge, preliminary hearing, 
          indictment, information, or arraignment.' " United States v. Smith, 
          778 F.2d 925, 931-32 (2d Cir.1985) (citing Kirby v. Illinois, 406 U.S. 
          682, 689, 92 S.Ct. 1877, 32 L.Ed.2d 411 (1972)). Here, the Court rejects 
          the Government's argument that Roger Drayer's statement that he wanted 
          to have an attorney appointed referred to his Sixth Amendment right. 
          It is undisputed that this statement was made immediately after his 
          arrest but before arraignment. The Second Circuit has held that the 
          Sixth Amendment right to counsel does not arise at the time of the arrest. 
          Smith, 778 F.2d at 932. Because the period in question was before the 
          commencement of an adversary judicial proceeding, the Sixth Amendment 
          is not applicable. *7 [12] Rather, the 
          issue turns on whether Roger Drayer's right to counsel under the Fifth 
          Amendment was violated. As previously stated, the Fifth Amendment requires 
          that, once a suspect is in custody and subject to interrogation, government 
          agents must apprise the suspect of his right to contact an attorney, 
          and to have an attorney present during questioning. Miranda v. Arizona, 
          384 U.S. 436, 467-71, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). In Edwards, 
          the Supreme Court held that, once the right to counsel is invoked, the 
          interrogation must cease until counsel is present, unless the suspect 
          thereafter indicates a waiver by initiating further communication with 
          law enforcement. 451 U.S. at 484-85. A defendant may invoke his right 
          to counsel "in any manner and at any stage of the process" 
          that counsel is desired. Miranda, 384 U.S. at 444-45. [13][14][15] Invocation 
          of the Fifth Amendment requires the suspect to make "some statement 
          that can reasonably be construed to be expression of a desire for the 
          assistance of an attorney in dealing with custodial interrogation by 
          the police." McNeil v. Wisconsin, 501 U.S. 171, 178, 111 S.Ct. 
          2204, 115 L.Ed.2d 158 (1991). Reference to an attorney that is ambiguous 
          or equivocal is insufficient to invoke the Fifth Amendment right to 
          cause law enforcement to cease their questioning. Davis v. United States, 
          512 U.S. 452, 459, 114 S.Ct. 2350, 129 L.Ed.2d 362 (1994). In addition, 
          the Court is mindful that it "must give a broad, rather than a 
          narrow, interpretation to a defendant's request for counsel." United 
          States v. Quiroz, 13 F.3d 505, 511 (2d Cir.1993) (internal quotations 
          and citation omitted). Indeed, any "doubts must be resolved in 
          favor of protecting the constitutional claim." Michigan v. Jackson, 
          475 U.S. 625, 633, 106 S.Ct. 1404, 89 L.Ed.2d 631 (1986). [16] In this case, 
          there is no dispute that Roger Drayer stated that he "would want 
          an attorney appointed for me." The Court finds that his statement 
          was an unambiguous and unequivocal assertion of his right to and need 
          for counsel. His statement was sufficient to put the FBI agents on notice 
          that he was requesting counsel and that, therefore, they were required 
          to refrain from questioning him until counsel was made available to 
          him. See Edwards, 451 U.S. at 484-85. Nevertheless, this rule does not 
          "foreclose finding a waiver of Fifth Amendment protections after 
          counsel has been requested, provided the accused has initiated the conversation 
          or discussion with the authorities." Minnick v. Mississippi, 498 
          U.S. 146, 156, 111 S.Ct. 486, 112 L.Ed.2d 489 (1990). The parties dispute 
          whether Roger Drayer voluntarily signed a written waiver form and consented 
          to be interviewed. Again, the defendants assert that he was coerced 
          to answer questions due to his concern for his children. Because the 
          parties dispute whether Roger Drayer voluntarily waived his Fifth Amendment 
          right to counsel, the Court will defer decision on this issue, as it 
          finds that a suppression hearing is necessary. Accordingly, United States 
          Magistrate Judge Michael L. Orenstein is requested to conduct a suppression 
          hearing and report to the Court with regard to the waiver issue. 3. As to the Bruton 
          Rule *8 [17] Finally, 
          the defendants argue that Roger Drayer's statements to the FBI agents 
          must be precluded pursuant to the rule in Bruton v. United States, 391 
          U.S. 123, 126, 88 S.Ct. 1620, 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968). In Bruton, the 
          Supreme Court held that the government is prohibited from introducing 
          a defendant's statement at trial if it implicates a co-defendant in 
          a joint trial because the co-defendant would be denied his Sixth Amendment 
          right to confront his accuser. Id. at 128. The Supreme Court later limited 
          the Bruton rule, holding that the Sixth Amendment is not violated where 
          a proper limiting instruction is given to the jury not to consider the 
          statement against the non- declarant and the statement is redacted to 
          eliminate the co-defendant's name and any reference to his or her existence. 
          Richardson v. Marsh, 481 U.S. 200, 211, 107 S.Ct. 1702, 95 L.Ed.2d 176 
          (1987). The statement must be appropriately redacted so that it does 
          not in any way indicate the identity or existence of the deleted codefendant. 
          Gray v. Maryland, 523 U.S. 185, 196, 118 S.Ct. 1151, 140 L.Ed.2d 294 
          (1998) ("we conclude that Richardson placed outside the scope of 
          Bruton's Rule those statements that incriminate inferentially"); 
          see also United States v. Smith, 198 F.3d 377, 385 (2d Cir.1999) ("In 
          addition, the plea allocution was not incriminating on its face because 
          it did not directly implicate Smith. Therefore, we find no violation 
          of Gray."). [18] Here, the Government 
          does not oppose redacting the statements as provided by Bruton, Richardson, 
          and Gray and does not object to a limiting instruction being given to 
          the jury regarding the use of the statements. Nevertheless, the defendants 
          argue that, because this case involves a family business, there is no 
          way to separate Roger Drayer's statements from the accusation against 
          his co-defendants. The Government contends, and the Court agrees, that 
          there is no rule barring the admission of a defendant's inculpatory 
          statement merely because some co-defendants are members of the defendant's 
          family. However, at this time, the Court declines to decide the potential 
          Bruton issues. Given the absence of a proposed redacted statement, the 
          Court is unable to determine whether, on its face, the redacted statement 
          sufficiently complies with the standards set forth in Bruton, Richardson, 
          and Gray. Therefore, the defendants' motion to suppress Roger Drayer's 
          statement on the ground that its admission would allegedly violate the 
          Bruton rule is denied without prejudice and with leave to renew. C. Motion to Suppress 
          Evidence concerning HSMT [19] The defendants 
          state that they have been charged with two counts of conspiracy: conspiracy 
          to commit bank fraud and wire fraud (count one) and conspiracy to commit 
          money laundering (count seven). The defendants contend that there will 
          be evidence presented at trial concerning a third conspiracy. According 
          to the defendants, this third conspiracy relates to allegations concerning 
          money funded to HSMT. The defendants assert that Payaddi Shivashankar, 
          an HSMT employee, is at the center of these allegations. For example, 
          the defendants state that, in the loan applications, Shivashankar allegedly 
          falsely represented that the money was to be used to finance the purchase 
          of medical equipment for HSMT and that the indictment alleges that the 
          HSMT loans contained forged signatures of doctors. The defendants contend 
          that the actions by Shivashankar and the HSMT partners were undertaken 
          independent of the PLS defendants. The defendants further contend that 
          there is no evidence that the PLS defendants were aware of the forged 
          signatures or any other misconduct on the part of Shivashankar or any 
          other principals or employees of HSMT. Because the indictment does not 
          charge this separate conspiracy, argue the defendants, all evidence 
          concerning the HSMT loans should be precluded at the trial. *9 The defendants' 
          argument is without merit. As the Government properly points out, whether 
          the PLS defendants knew that Shivashankar or HSMT principals or employees 
          forged signatures in order to further the scheme is immaterial. See 
          United States v. Zichettello, 208 F.3d 72, 100 (2d Cir.2000) ("There 
          is no rule requiring the government to prove that a conspirator knew 
          of all criminal acts by insiders in furtherance of the conspiracy."). 
          In addition, the indictment here charged one conspiracy to defraud financial 
          institutions by obtaining financing under false pretenses and describes 
          a scheme in which the PLS defendants and Shivashankar agreed to achieve 
          that objective on behalf of HSMT. Furthermore, even assuming proof of 
          multiple conspiracies, generally, this is a question of fact for the 
          jury. United States v. Vazquez, 113 F.3d 383, 386 (2d Cir.1997). Accordingly, 
          the defendants' motion to suppress all the evidence concerning the HSMT 
          loans at trial is denied. D. Motion to Dismiss 
          the Indictment against Adam Drayer or to Sever his Trial [20] The defendants 
          move to dismiss the indictment against Adam Drayer on the ground that 
          "there is insufficient evidence to connect Adam Drayer to the conspiracy." 
          Insufficiency of the evidence before a grand jury is an insufficient 
          ground to dismiss a facially valid indictment. See United States v. 
          Casamento, 887 F.2d 1141, 1182 (2d Cir.1989) ("An indictment, if 
          valid on its face, may not be challenged on the ground that it is based 
          on inadequate evidence."). [21] In addition, 
          no defects in the indictment against Adam Drayer warrant dismissal. 
          An indictment need only track the language of the statute charged and 
          state the approximate time and place of the alleged crime. See United 
          States v. Pirro, 212 F.3d 86, 92 (2d Cir.2000) ("We have consistently 
          upheld indictments that do little more than to track the language of 
          the statute charged and state the time and place (in approximate terms) 
          of the alleged crime.") (internal quotations and citations omitted). 
          Because the indictment here more than satisfies these requirements, 
          the motion to dismiss the indictment against Adam Drayer is denied. In the alternative, 
          pursuant to Rule 14 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the 
          defendants argue that the Court should sever Adam Drayer's trial from 
          that of the remaining defendants because joint trials of these offenses 
          and these defendants would be severely prejudicial. In particular, the 
          defendants argue that, due to the familial relationships between Adam 
          Drayer and his co-defendants and his minor role in the alleged offenses, 
          severance is necessary. [22][23] Rule 14 
          empowers a court to grant a severance "if it appears that a defendant 
          ... is prejudiced by a joinder of ... defendants ... for trial together...." 
          Fed.R.Crim.P. 14. A court should sever trials of co-defendants under 
          Rule 14 only if there is a serious risk that a joint trial would compromise 
          a specific trial right of one of the defendants, or prevent the jury 
          from making a reliable judgment about guilt or lack of guilt. Zafiro 
          v. United States, 506 U.S. 534, 539, 113 S.Ct. 933, 122 L.Ed.2d 317 
          (1993); United States v. Rahman, 189 F.3d 88, 122 (2d Cir.1999). Even 
          if some prejudice is shown, Rule 14 does not require severance. See 
          United States v. Haynes, 16 F.3d 29, 32 (2d Cir.1994). Rather, "limiting 
          instructions often will suffice to cure any risk of prejudice." 
          Zafiro, 506 U.S. at 539. *10 [24][25] The 
          Court finds that severance is not necessary in this case. First, "differences 
          in degree of guilt and possibly degree of notoriety" of defendants 
          do not require that there be separate trials. United States v. Aloi, 
          511 F.2d 585, 598 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1015, 96 S.Ct. 447, 
          46 L.Ed.2d 386 (1975). Indeed, "differing levels of culpability 
          and proof are inevitable in any multi-defendant trial and, standing 
          alone, are insufficient grounds for separate trials." United States 
          v. Carson, 702 F.2d 351, 367 (2d Cir.1983). Second, there is no reason 
          to conclude that a jury would be unable to distinguish among family 
          members in finding guilt or lack of guilt. Finally, even if the Court 
          severed Adam Drayer's trial from that of his co-defendants, much of 
          the evidence introduced in one trial to establish the conspiracy would 
          be introduced in the other. See United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315, 
          341 (2d Cir.1993) ("Evidence at the joint trial of alleged co- 
          conspirators that, because of the alleged conspiratorial nature of the 
          illegal activity, would have been admissible at a separate trial of 
          the moving defendant is neither spillover nor prejudicial."); United 
          States v. Muyet, 945 F.Supp. 586, 596 (S.D.N.Y.1996) ("[E]ven if 
          the Court were to grant severance, much of the evidence regarding ... 
          co-defendants' acts of violence would be admissible in ... [their] trial 
          as proof of the existence and nature of the conspiracy ."). Moreover, to the 
          extent that the evidence against one defendant may not relate to another, 
          the Court will either redact or issue limiting instructions to cure 
          any possible prejudice. Zafiro, 506 U.S. at 539. Thus, the Court finds 
          that the defendants have not demonstrated the existence of a serious 
          risk that a joint trial will compromise a specific trial right or prevent 
          the jury from making a reliable judgment about guilt or lack of guilt. 
          Id.; Rahman, 189 F.3d 122. Accordingly, the Court denies the motion 
          by the defendants for severance as to defendant Adam Drayer. E. Motion to Produce 
          Brady and Giglio Materials [26] The defendants 
          move for the disclosure of all Brady and Giglio materials. The Government 
          acknowledges its duty to disclose exculpatory evidence pursuant to Brady 
          v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), 
          and represents that it will disclose any Brady materials when they become 
          known. This representation by the Government is a sufficient basis for 
          denying an application to compel disclosure under Brady. [27][28] In addition, 
          the Government states that it will abide by its obligations to disclose 
          impeachment materials pursuant to Giglio v.. United States, 405 U.S. 
          150, 154-55, 92 S.Ct. 763, 31 L.Ed.2d 104 (1972). The Government further 
          represents that it will disclose all Giglio material three days prior 
          to the trial. As there is no pre-trial discovery right to Giglio materials, 
          see United States v.. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 701, 94 S.Ct. 3090, 41 L.Ed.2d 
          1039 (1974), the Court accepts the Government's representation that 
          it will produce such materials three days in advance of the trial. Accordingly, 
          the Court denies the defendants' motion seeking disclosure of all Brady 
          and Giglio material. F. Motion for a Bill 
          of Particulars *11 Under Rule 7 
          of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a district court "may 
          direct the filing of a bill of particulars." Fed.R.Civ.P. 7(f). 
          A bill of particulars enables a defendant "to identify with sufficient 
          particularity the nature of the charge pending against him, thereby 
          enabling the defendant to prepare for trial, to prevent surprise, and 
          to interpose a plea of double jeopardy should he be prosecuted a second 
          time for the same offense." United States v. Bortnovsky, 820 F.2d 
          572, 574 (2d Cir.1987) (citations omitted). In the defendants' request 
          for a bill of particulars, they ask the Government, among other things, 
          (1) to identify which allegedly fraudulent schemes correspond to which 
          loans; (2) to explain how the loss figures were calculated; and (3) 
          to state where the Government believes the proceeds of the crimes were 
          secreted or what documents support the Government's case with respect 
          to each individual allegation for each loan. [29][30] To determine 
          a motion for a bill of particulars, " 'the important question is 
          whether the information sought is necessary, not whether it is helpful.' 
          " United States v. Amendolara, No. 01 CR 694, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 
          19981, at *12 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 15, 2002) (quoting United States v. Facciolo, 
          753 F.Supp. 449, 451 (S.D.N.Y.1990)) The decision to grant a motion 
          for a bill of particulars is within the sound discretion of the district 
          court. See United States v. Walsh, 194 F.3d 37, 47 (2d Cir.1999) (citation 
          omitted). Where the defendant is adequately informed of the charges 
          against him, the Government need not particularize all of its evidence. 
          United States v. Torres, 901 F.2d 205, 234 (2d Cir.2000). "Acquisition 
          of evidentiary detail is not a function of a bill of particulars." 
          Id. Indeed, "[t]he proper scope and function of a bill of particulars 
          is not to obtain disclosure of evidence or witnesses to be offered by 
          the Government at trial...." United States v. Strawberry, 892 F.Supp. 
          519, 526 (S.D.N.Y.1995) (citing United States v. Salazar, 485 F.2d 1272, 
          1278 (2d Cir.1973)). [31] In this case, 
          the Court finds that the indictment sufficiently informs the defendants 
          of the nature of the charges against them, namely a conspiracy to commit 
          bank and wire fraud and a conspiracy to commit money laundering, thereby 
          enabling them to prepare a defense in this trial. Moreover, the Government 
          supplied a letter to the defendants, dated December 17, 2003, outlining 
          the specific fraudulent loans that it intends to refer to at the trial. 
          The Court agrees with the Government that the level of detail the defendants 
          seek is neither required nor necessary to enable them to prepare a defense 
          and avoid unfair surprise at the trial. Accordingly, the motion for 
          a bill of particulars is denied. G. Motion to Provide 
          all Statements and Grand Jury Testimony of PLS Employees [32] The defendants 
          request that the Court order the Government to produce any statements 
          of the defendants, including employees of PLS, in accordance with Rule 
          16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. In particular, the defendants 
          request the statements made by former employee Zambaras. Rule 16 entitles 
          the defendants to discovery materials that the government intends to 
          introduce at the trial or that is material to their defense. Fed.R.Crim.P. 
          16(a)(1). The Government represents that it will produce the statements 
          of all prospective witnesses, including Zambaras, three days prior to 
          the trial. The Court has no basis to conclude that the Government will 
          do otherwise with regard to its obligations under Rule 16. Accordingly, 
          based on the Government's assurance, the defendants' request to order 
          production of Rule 16 materials is denied. III. CONCLUSION *12 Based on the 
          foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED, that the 
          defendants' motion to suppress documents obtained by Frank Zambaras 
          is DEFERRED, pending the outcome of the suppression hearing; and it 
          is further       Please note:   “  MINUTE ENTRY as to Payaddi Shivashankar (7); 
          Case before Judge Wall on 2/24/04 @ 11:13 a.m., for Criminal Cause for 
          Pleading. Dft Shivashankar present in custody with CJA counsel Edward 
          Jenks. Govt: Geoffrey Kaiser. CD 04-3. Dft enters plea of GUILTY to 
          Count One (of a seven Count) Superseding Indictment. Sentencing set 
          for 6/25/04 @ 9:30 a.m. before Judge Spatt. Dft remains in custody. 
          Magistrate Judge Wall recommends that the District Court accept the 
          guilty plea. (Coleman, Laurie)” from: https://ecf.nyed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/HistDocQry.pl?544373250123187-L      ( He was one of the original indicted, and perhaps it is from seeing 
          too many “Law and Order” television 
          shows, but the impression is he is going to turn state’s evidence on an appeal arrangement 
          and thus the “early” guilty plea. editor )     Previous stories on RW Professional Leasing:                    http://www.leasingnews.org/Conscious-Top%20Stories/RW_stories.htm   Hansabank 
          to Expand Russian Operation   Hansabank Group, 
          reportedly the Baltic's biggest financial services company, has announced 
          its plans  to expand its presence in neighboring Russia 
          by setting up a new bank or acquiring an existing one and increasing 
          its leasing operations in the former Soviet Union.   The majority owner 
          of Hansabank is the Swedish banking group ForeningsSparbanken, which 
          has operated in Russia through its Hansa Leasing Russia subsidiary since 
          2002.      ``Our primary target 
          is not to win a very dramatic market share but to help our clients expand 
          in Russia,'' Druvis Murmanis, the newly appointed head of Hansabank's 
          Russian operations, told The Associated Press.   Murmanis did not 
          specify which Russian banks Hansabank might be targeting, but he said 
          the new outlet would help it serve its Baltic and Scandinavian clients 
          and a limited number of Russian customers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Exchange 
          Rate : Europe Should Be Buying U.S.    from 
          Leasing Gems by Jeffrey Taylor     From an European 
          perspective, American assets look downright inexpensive. Weakened by 
          huge U.S. trade deficits and low interest rates, the dollar has plunged 
          32 percent since its October 2000 peak. And with merger-and-acquisition 
          activity heating up on both sides of the Atlantic, one might expect 
          a "European invasion" like the 1998-2000 spree that led to 
          BP-Amoco-Arco, Vodafone-AirTouch, and Daimler- Chrysler.    So why did European 
          companies strike only 97 first- quarter deals in the United States this 
          year, down from 133 in a year-earlier period when overall global M&A 
          activity was far weaker? Blame it on exchange rates.    Exchange rates dictate 
          that U.S. companies should shun European acquisitions. For example, 
          Home Depot CEO Robert Nardelli scotched January rumors of a possible 
          British deal earlier this year by calling the idea "dumb," 
          and arguing that "there couldn't be a worse time to do an international 
          acquisition, with the euro at $1.25 to $1.28."    Lately, Americans 
          have moved to snap up 160 European businesses in the latest quarter-most 
          of them in small or midsize deals-including Yahoo's $574 million (475 
          million euro) offer for France-based Internet company Kelkoo.    Indeed, in dollar-value 
          terms, American buying of European assets is an emerging trend, building 
          on last year's doubling of announced U.S. cross-border deal- making 
          from $36.3 billion to $74.8 billion-led by General Electric's $9.5 billion 
          plan to buy British medical- diagnostics company Amersham.    The reasons for this 
          seeming flip-flop of European and American roles start with an old M&A 
          adage: acquisition decisions are based far more on strategy and fit 
          than on currency values.    "While the economy 
          is improving, continental Europe still has some concerns going forward," 
          suggests Henri Servaes, professor of finance at London Business School. 
          Amid slow growth, many European companies, especially those in the euro-zone, 
          are still restructuring to cut costs."    One problem with 
          buying American assets to take advantage of the weak dollar, is that 
          the cash flows eventually coming from the purchase must be repatriated 
          at the future exchange rate, which is difficult to predict.    Companies enamored 
          of the exchange-rate advantages of a transatlantic transaction typically 
          forget the risks inherent in that type of deal. Transactions are often 
          more complex, while presenting higher regulatory and cultural hurdles. 
           ---   Note from Jeffrey 
             If you believe the 
          theories enumerated in the above excerpt, one could easily conclude 
          that to solve the world's economic problems, every country has to adopt 
          the same currency. As a result weak currencies would rise and strong 
          currencies would fall to worldwide economic equilibrium    Which currency would 
          you pick? Any suggestions? Please e-mail me your thoughts. I am going 
          to be lecturing in London at The Leasing Academy and Sorrento, Italy 
          for the Pan-European Leaseurope Conference this fall and would love 
          to hear from my readers.           email: jtaylor@executivecaliber.ws    voice: 801-299-9332    web: http://executivecaliber.ws 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 Equipment Sales Representative 
 
 Business 
          Leasing News May Edition     Lessees in Bankruptcy 
          Declare Open Season on True Leasing   Lenders Perform Four Key Tasks in Texas Wind Energy Projects General Aviation 
          Begins to Grow, Presenting Financing Opportunities    States Increase Tax Receipts, But Shortfalls Persist Leasing 101: What 
          is "Revenue Recognition"?    BLN Briefs: TRIA Extension Debated; CIOs Reduce Tech Spending; 
          Cape Town Bill Introduced   Training Offered Feedback;    http://two.leasingnews.org/loose_files/Bus_Leasing_News.htm   ### Press Release 
          ###################################### RAI 
          Announces Closing of Subsidiary's Initial Public Offering and Certain 
          Management Changes     Resource America 
          Inc.(Nasdaq:REXI) (the "Company") announced  that its subsidiary Atlas America, Inc. (Nasdaq:ATLS) has completed 
          an initial public offering of shares of its common stock. Atlas America 
          sold 2,300,000 shares at a price of $15.50 per share through underwriters 
          Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co., Inc. and KeyBanc Capital Markets.   The net proceeds 
          of the offering of $33.2 million after deducting underwriting discounts, 
          will be distributed to Resource America in the form of a repayment of 
          inter-company debt and a non-taxable dividend. Resource America continues 
          to own approximately 82.3% of ATLS common stock.   The underwriters 
          have been granted an over-allotment option for an additional 345,000 
          shares of common stock exercisable within thirty days. The over-allotment 
          option, if fully exercised, would generate an additional $5.0 million 
          in net proceeds for distribution to Resource America, thus reducing 
          its ownership to 80.2%.   Resource America 
          intends to distribute all of its remaining ATLS shares to REXI's common 
          stockholders in the form of a tax-free dividend anticipated to occur 
          by the end of 2004. The dividend is contingent upon the satisfaction 
          or waiver of a variety of conditions, including, among other things, 
          the receipt of a favorable tax ruling from the Internal Revenue Service. 
          Accordingly, the distribution may not occur at the contemplated time 
          and may not occur at all.   In connection with 
          the initial public offering by Atlas America, Inc., the Company also 
          announces changes in executive responsibility. Edward E. Cohen, CEO 
          of the Company, is retiring from his position as CEO of the Company, 
          but will continue as non-executive Chairman. Mr. Cohen also serves as 
          Chairman and CEO of Atlas America, Inc. Jonathan Z. Cohen will assume 
          the responsibilities of CEO of Resource America, Inc. and continue as 
          President of the Company.   For more complete 
          information about Atlas America, Inc. and the offering, you may obtain 
          a prospectus by submitting requests to Ms. Kathy Innis, Friedman, Billings, 
          Ramsey, 1001 19th Street, North Arlington, Virginia, 22209.   Resource America, 
          Inc. is an asset management company that uses industry- specific expertise 
          to generate and administer investment opportunities for its own account 
          and for outside investors in the energy, financial services, real estate 
          and equipment leasing industries. For more information please visit 
          our website at www.resourceamerica.com or contact Investor Relations 
          at pschreiber@resourceamerica.com.   Statements made in 
          this release may include forward-looking statements, which involve substantial 
          risks and uncertainties. The Company's actual results, performance or 
          achievements could differ materially from those expressed or implied 
          in this release.   CONTACT: Resource 
          America Inc., Philadelphia Pamela Schreiber, 
           215-546-5005 Fax: 215-546-5388 
 ### Press Release 
          ##################################### Doug 
          Cain joins GMAC Commercial Finance’s Equipment Finance Division     SOUTHFIELD, Mich.— 
          GMAC Commercial Finance (GMAC CF), part of General Motors Acceptance 
          Corporation (GMAC) since 1999, announces that Doug Cain has recently 
          joined the company’s Equipment Finance Division’s (EFD) legal team as 
          vice president/counsel based in the Atlanta, Ga. office.   Cain most recently 
          served as AVP counsel for ORIX Financial Services for the past three 
          years. At ORIX, Cain worked on a wide range of commercial finance and 
          syndications matters, including lending and leasing transactions involving 
          various asset classes. Prior to joining ORIX, Cain spent two years with 
          Peachtree Franchise Finance representing lenders in secured lending 
          transactions involving franchise restaurants, gas stations and convenience 
          stores.   Cain is a graduate 
          of Emroy University School of Law and holds a J.D. degree.   GMAC Commercial Finance, 
          considered a leader in its segment of the financial services market, 
          provides asset-based lending, equipment finance/leasing, structured 
          finance and factoring services to a wide variety of middle-market clients 
          in diverse industries. Loan facilities are in the $1 million to $200 
          million range. With locations in the United States, Canada, Hong Kong 
          and the United Kingdom, the Company is positioned to provide lending 
          services worldwide.   GMAC Commercial Finance 
          is part of GMAC Financial Services. GMACFS has been a wholly owned subsidiary 
          of General Motors Corporation since 1919. Located in Atlanta, Ga., the 
          Equipment Finance Division can be reached at 678 553-2700.     Sites of Reference:   CONTACT: Kim Rutherford GMAC Commercial Finance Phone Number: 248.358.8322 Fax Number: 248.350.2733 E-mail: krutherford@gmaccf.com 
 ### Press Relese 
          ##################################### Patriot 
          Commercial Leasing Company, Inc. Appoints Donna M. Wesemann Sales Manager   POTTSTOWN, Pa. - 
          - Patriot Bank (Nasdaq: PBIX) announced the appointment of Donna M. 
          Wesemann as sales manager of Patriot Commercial Leasing Company, Inc.  In this role, Wesemann will lead the company's sales development 
          efforts, including management of sales and marketing.    A graduate of Hallahan 
          Catholic High School, Philadelphia, Pa., Wesemann attended Pennsylvania 
          State University and has taken finance courses through the Pennsylvania 
          Bankers Association.   Wesemann has over 
          20 years experience in the leasing industry. She joined Patriot Commercial 
          Leasing in 1999 and has been its top producer for the last four years. 
          Prior to joining Patriot, Wesemann was vice president and sales manager, 
          National Penn Bank, Boyertown, Pa., and vice president, American Business 
          Leasing, Bala Cynwyd, Pa.   Wesemann resides 
          Blue Bell, Pa.   Patriot Bank Corp. 
          is a full service financial institution with 17 branches in Montgomery, 
          Berks, Lehigh, Northampton, and Chester counties. In addition to its 
          strong consumer retail banking services, Patriot Bank specializes in 
          business banking needs, providing a wide range of commercial banking 
          products and personalized service to small and medium-sized businesses. 
          Patriot Bank offers a full line of checking, savings, loan and investment 
          products for both consumer and business needs.   Contact: Ken Collins, 
          President Patriot Commercial 
          Leasing Company, Inc. 610-705-4999 
 ### 
            Press Release #####################################   Ameritrans 
            Reports Loss Fiscal Year 2004 Third Quarters     NEW 
            YORK--Ameritrans Capital Corporation (NASDAQ:AMTC, AMTCP) reported 
            financial results for the quarter ended March 31, 2004. For the company's 
            third fiscal quarter, total investment income was $1.43 million compared 
            to $1.55 million during the prior comparable period. Ameritrans reported 
            a net loss available to common shareholders for the third quarter 
            of fiscal year 2004 of ($135,998) or ($0.07) per basic and diluted 
            common share, versus a net loss of ($182,222) or ($0.09) per basic 
            and diluted common share for the same period of fiscal year 2003. 
            The Company's net loan portfolio at March 31, 2004 was $54.1 million 
            versus $55.1 million at March 31, 2003. Not included in the net loan 
            portfolio for the period ended March 31, 2004 was $1.42 million of 
            medallions owned which are represented through inter-company receivables 
            from wholly-owned subsidiaries. The Company's net equity securities 
            at March 31, 2004 were $1,011,507 versus $929,405 at June 30, 2003. 
                  For the nine months ended March 31, 2004, 
            Ameritrans reported total investment income of $4.30 million, compared 
            to $4.74 million during the prior comparable period. Net loss available 
            to common shareholders for the nine months ended March 31, 2004 was 
            ($616,963) or ($0.30) per basic and diluted common share, versus a 
            profit of $215,046, or $0.11 for the nine months ended March 31, 2003. 
                  Gary C. Granoff, President of Ameritrans stated, 
            "We have improved our net investment loss for the third quarter 
            of fiscal year 2004, an increase on both a quarter-over-quarter and 
            sequential basis. Our operating loss has diminished and our programs 
            in Chicago to resell our defaulted medallion collateral, including 
            our leasing programs through our new limited liability company subsidiaries, 
            are making substantial progress and will have a positive result on 
            future revenues and cash flow. Although we continue to be affected 
            by the remaining foreclosures of Chicago medallion taxi loans that 
            are still in progress, we expect to complete the remaining sales over 
            the next few months. We believe that the steps taken during fiscal 
            2004 will produce better results for the company for the fiscal year 
            ending June 30, 2005."       Ameritrans Capital Corporation is a specialty 
            finance company engaged in making loans to and investments in small 
            businesses. Ameritrans' wholly owned subsidiary Elk Associates Funding 
            Corporation, was licensed by the United States Small Business Administration 
            as a Small Business Investment Company (SBIC) in 1980. The company 
            maintains its offices at 747 Third Avenue; 4th Floor; New York, NY 
            10017.   ONTACT:Ameritrans 
            Capital Corporation, New York Gary Granoff, 212-355-2449      or                                              Gregory FCA Communications, 
            Inc. Kathy Keyser, 610-642-8253 ### 
            Press Release ##################################### New 
            Aircraft Asset Management & Trading Company Formed     GREENWICH, 
            Conn.----JetWorks Leasing LLC, a new company specializing in commercial 
            aircraft trading and lease portfolio asset management, announced its 
            formation today. It is headed by industry veterans and financial experts 
            specializing in these fields. JetWorks Leasing also announced that 
            it has been hired to manage a portfolio of 18 wide-body air freighters 
            for a group of international banks and investors.       "JetWorks Leasing was founded to take 
            advantage of current aircraft values and to provide much needed risk 
            capital and other value added services to the aviation sector," 
            said Thomas W. Mahr, Founding Partner and Chief Executive Officer 
            of JetWorks  Leasing plans to add more portfolio management 
            assignments and to begin trading and/or owning commercial aircraft 
            for investors and its own account. James N. Chapman, Non-Executive 
            Chairman of JetWorks Leasing, added "The high volatility of aircraft-linked 
            asset values provides JetWorks Leasing with a unique opportunity to 
            achieve favorable risk-adjusted returns. This is accomplished through 
            our ability to actively manage aircraft throughout the life cycle, 
            both used and new."       The JetWorks Leasing team is composed of founders 
            of SkyWorks Capital LLC, a premier investment bank servicing the aviation 
            sector, and former founders of Boullioun Aviation Services, a premier 
            aircraft operating lessor. The team has more than 100 years of aviation/aircraft-related 
            experience in areas that include marketing and remarking aircraft, 
            both on- and off-lease; structuring/negotiating tax-based, leveraged 
            and operating leases; restructuring aircraft-related leases/loans; 
            and advising on aircraft-related and general aviation investments.  
                  Key professionals of JetWorks Leasing include 
            the following:        --  Thomas 
            W. Mahr, Chief Executive Officer. He is a Founding Partner and Managing 
            Director of SkyWorks Capital and has more than 20 years of experience 
            in aviation finance, having served  
            as both an investment banker and senior airline finance         executive over his career.        --  James 
            N. Chapman, Non-Executive Chairman. He is associated  with Regiment Capital Advisors, a high yield 
            and special  situations hedge-fund 
            based in Boston. He is also affiliated  
            with SkyWorks Capital and has approximately 20 years of         experience in investment banking.        --  Robert 
            Penski, Chief Operating Officer. He is also the Owner, President and 
            CEO of American Aviation Resources. Penski  
            specializes in troubled aircraft and airline situations. Hisfirm 
            is the only US-owned aviation company licensed by the US         government to conduct business with Cuba. Penski was former 
            head of used aircraft sales at The Boeing Company and    co-founded Boullioun Aviation Services, where 
            he was a former  Partner, EVP 
            and Director.        --  Sheldon 
            Best is Executive Vice President-Marketing. He is President of Best 
            Consulting Co. and Best Aircraft Leasing, and an advisor in several 
            roles to Aviation Partners Boeing, the 737 winglet company. He was 
            a former Partner and Director  of 
            Boullioun Aviation Services and held various airline  
            executive and CEO positions during his long career in  aviation.  
                  --  Jeffrey 
            S. Craine, Senior Vice President-Finance and Chief   Financial Officer. Craine is also a Vice President 
            of SkyWorks   Capital. He previously 
            held senior positions with companies  working in aviation investment banking and financial advisory         
            services.        --  Gary 
            Anderson, Senior Vice President-Technical Operations. Anderson held 
            technical positions with various airlines and leasing companies including 
            Qantas and C-S Aviation and has  run 
            various freighter conversion programs.  
                  --  Simon 
            Chiu, Vice President-Financial Planning. He is also employed by SkyWorks 
            Capital, and previously by Mitsubishi  
            Trust & Banking Corp.'s Aircraft Special Finance Group 
            as well as Standard and Poors.        JetWorks Leasing specializes in commercial 
            aircraft trading and lease portfolio asset management services.   CONTACT:JetWorks Leasing, LLC Jeffrey S. Craine, 203-983-6686 www.jetworksleasing.com #### 
            Press Release #################################### Charter 
            One Vendor Finance Announces New Healthcare Finance Initiative   LISLE, 
            Illinois  – Charter One Vendor 
            Finance LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Charter One Financial (NYSE: 
            CF), today announced the launching of a new, focused industry initiative 
            that will provide a wide range of financing and leasing products tailored 
            to meet the needs of manufacturers and specialized intermediaries 
            serving the U.S. healthcare industry.    Charter 
            One Vendor Finance will work primarily on a wholesale basis aligning 
            itself with healthcare equipment manufacturers currently using financing 
            to facilitate their sales. In addition, the group will work with other 
            financial institutions seeking to sell and/or participate their healthcare 
            investments due to exposure, concentration or rate sensitivity issues.   Heading 
            up this new initiative will be Donna Hamel, who has been named Vice 
            President, Healthcare Finance. Hamel brings over 25 years experience 
            in the equipment finance and leasing industry. She was formerly V.P. 
            International Sales and Marketing for DVI Financial Services and has 
            held senior sales and marketing positions with GE Capital, CitiCapital, 
            Hong Kong Shanghai Bank and Pitney Bowes Credit Corporation.   “Charter 
            One Vendor Finance’s value proposition in healthcare is its focus 
            and experience in a very complex market, its reliability as a source 
            of cost effective funding, and its non-competitive approach on the 
            direct sales side.   This collaborative 
            approach positions us as an ideal partner for the long term” said 
            Charles Schultz, President of Charter One Vendor Finance. “It’s a 
            terrific opportunity to bring together the dynamics of an experienced 
            healthcare vendor finance team with the tremendous resources of Charter 
            One Vendor Finance and Charter One Financial.”   Charter 
            One Vendor Finance, based in Lisle, IL, operates as a subsidiary of 
            Charter One Bank and is fully staffed with an experienced team of 
            sales, underwriting, documentation, and operations personnel.   Charter 
            One has over $41 billion in total assets, making it one of the 25 
            largest bank holding companies in the country. The Bank has over 616 
            branch locations in Ohio, Michigan, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, 
            and Vermont. The Company’s diverse product set includes: consumer 
            banking, indirect auto finance, commercial leasing, business lending, 
            commercial real estate lending, mortgage banking, and retail investment 
            products. For additional information, investors are directed to Charter 
            One’s web site: www.charterone.com. 
                 CONTACT: Cindy 
            Schulze Charter 
            One Phone 
            Number: (216) 298-7155 
 ### 
            Press Release ##################################### 
   News 
          Briefs---   Oil Prices Surge; 
          Gas Prices Hit Record http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35177-2004May18.html   Consumers win Supreme 
          Court bankruptcy rulings http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20040517-1401-scotus-bankruptcy.html   National Housing 
          Survey Shows that Key ‘Gaps’ Pose a Challenge to Expanding Homeownership http://www.hispanicprwire.c Consumers 
          win Supreme Court bankruptcy rulings http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20040517-1401-scotus- bankruptcy.htmlom/news_in.php?id=2212&cha=14   UPS shipping data 
          provide a real-time look at economy http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/0504/16ups.html   Offshoring of U.S. 
          jobs accelerating, researchers say http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/management/2004-05-17-more-outsourcing_x.htm   Japanese Economy 
          Grew 1.4 Percent in 1Q http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35287-2004May18.html   Sheldon Adelson Opens 
          Casino in Macau http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35290-2004May18.html 
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sports 
          Briefs---   Unwelcome home/Sharks 
          pushed to brink of elimination http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/05/18/SHARKS.TMP   Madhouse and Wade 
          Inspiring the Heat http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/18/sports/basketball/18heat.html   Shannon Sharp Replaces 
          Deion Sanders on ``The NFL http://www.theredzone.org/news/showarticle.asp?ArticleID=1157   Another day of Giants' 
          bloopers—Skip Bayless http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/columnists/skip 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ “Gimme 
          that Wine”     Owner of Château 
          Lafite Proposes a Deal That Would Give It a Napa Valley Presence    ----Frank J. Prial http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/18/business/18wine.html   Domaine Drouhin Oregon 
          to Open to the Public http://www.winespectator.com/Wine/Daily/News/0,1145,2461,00.html   Beringer Vineyards 
          Introduces Bilingual Label for America's Top-Selling Bottled Wine http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news _view&newsId=20040517005311&newsLang=en   Mouton-Rothschild 
          Owner Buys Neighboring Bordeaux Estate http://www.winespectator.com/Wine/Daily/News/0,1145,2473,00.html   French wine producers 
          outraged at TV criticism of industry http://news.scotsman.com/entertainment.cfm?id=561752004   Screw caps return, 
          as wineries work to put a lid on cork taint http://www.modbee.com/columnists/moran/story/8574790p-9431658c.html   New Stemware Accessory 
          Offers Solution to Dishwasher Dilemma ( however not recommend 
          for Reidel and other special wine glasses) http://www.winespectator.com/Wine/Daily/News/0,1145,2463,00.html   Online New Wine Appreciation 
          Class Available  http://www.vino.com/press/press_release.asp?PRID=338 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This 
          Day in American History   ((  fyi 1291- Acre, the last territory in Palestine 
          taken by the first Crusaders, fell to invading Moslem armies. It signaled 
          the end of a Christian "military presence" in the Near East. 
          (Afterwards, friars sought to spread the gospel by preaching instead.) 
          )     1631 
          -The General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony decreed that 'no 
          man shall be admitted to the body politic but such as are members of 
          some of the churches within the limits' of the colony. (Separation of 
          church and state was an unthinkable concept in early American colonialism. 
          In contrast to what is taught in schools, most were not escaping for religious 
          freedoms, but were missionaries with strong prejudices against other religious groups 
          except for their own.)     1652- 
          Rhode Island enacted a slavery emancipation law: “No blacken mankind 
          or white...(maybe) forced by covenant bond or otherwise to serve any 
          man or his assignees longer than ten years, or until they come to be 
          24 years of age, if they be taken in under 15, from the time of their 
          coming within the Liberties of the Colonies, and at the end of termed 
          of ten years...( are to be set) free, as is the manner with the English 
          servants. And that man that will not let them goe free, or shall sell 
          them elsewhere, to that end that they may be enslaved to others for 
          a long time, he or they shall forfeit to theColonie forty pounds.”     1766- 
          The Church of the United Brethren in Christ was organized in Lancaster, 
          PA, under the leadership of Martin Boehm, 41, and Philip William Otterbein, 
          39. (It became a branch of the Evangelical United Brethren in 1946.)     1798 
          - The first Secretary of the U.S. Navy was appointed. He was Benjamin 
          Stoddert.       http://www.history.navy.mil/bios/stoddert.htm      http://www.mariner.org/usnavy/05/05d.htm     1827 
          -- US: Josiah Warren opens his first Time Store in Cincinnati, Ohio 
          — the first commercial cooperative. Warren, Josiah, 1798–1874, American 
          reformer & anarchist, b. Boston. An early follower of Robert Owen, 
          he soon rejected Owen's political socialism, advocating instead anarchy 
          based on “the sovereignty of the individual.” Warren founded several 
          “equity” or "time" stores, with the idea of exchanging goods 
          for an equivalent amount of labor & on the principle that cost should 
          be the limit of price. He also established three utopian colonies; the 
          most successful was Modern Times (1851–c.1860) , Long Island, N.Y. (now 
          Brentwood). The most important of his publications was True Civilization 
          (1863, 5th ed. 1875). http://faculty.evansville.edu/ck6/bstud/warren.html See "The Lemonade 
          Ocean & Modern Times" by Hakim Bey, http://www.evolutionzone.com/kulturezone/bey/lemonade.ocean.and.modern.times.html http://www.blancmange.net/tmh/articles/manifesto.shtml 1860 --Republican Party nominates Abraham Lincoln for president http://www.mcmaster.ca/russdocs/russell.htm http://www.sci.fi/~phinnweb/links/philosophy.html 1896- Plessy v. Ferguson: the Supreme Court ruled separate-but-equal facilities constitutional on intrastate railroads. For fifty years, the Plessy v. Ferguson decision upheld the principle of racial segregation. Across the country, laws mandated separate accommodations on buses and trains, and in hotels, theaters, and schools. 1912—Perry Como Birthday 1927 - Grauman's Chinese Theater on Hollywood Boulevard was opened, the first of the Fox chain of movie theaters. The lavish 2,200 seat theater cost $1 million to build. Its first film was shown on this date, Cecil B. DeMille's King of Kings, at the high price of $2.00 per seat. It was later renamed Mann's Chinese Theater.     1931-Bix Biederbecke joins Casa Loma 
          Band for a date at Metroplitan Hotel, Boston.     1944- 
          the Allies Captured Monte Cassino ( you may remember the movie ).  
          There had been five Allied attempts to take the German position 
          at The Benedictine abbey at Monte Cassino.  Although the abbey had been reduced to rubble, 
          it served as a bunker for the Germans and they could relay all activity 
          in the area to airplanes and giant cannot attacks. In the spring of 
          1944 Marshal Alphonese Pierre Juin devised an operation that crossed 
          the mountainous regions behind the fortress like structure, using Moroccan 
          troops of the French Expeditionary Force. Specially trained for mountain 
          operations, they climbed 4,850 feet to locate a pass.  
          On May 15, 1944, they attached the Germans from behind. On May 
          18, Polish troops attached to this force took Monte Cassino.     1946---Top 
          Hits All Through the Day 
          - Perry Como The Gypsy - The Ink 
          Spots Shoo Fly Pie - The 
          Stan Kenton Orchestra (vocal: June Christy) New Spanish Two Step 
          - Bob Wills     1952 
          -- US / Canada: Which Side Are You on? Paul Robeson, in dramatic defiance 
          of government’s ban on his leaving US soil, standing on a flatbed truck 
          parked one foot inside the US border at the Peace Arch, in Blaine, Washington, 
          speaks and sings to a crowd of 40,000 Canadians & Americans gathered 
          on both sides of the border. (My father Lawrence 
          Menkin was a recipient of the Paul Robeson Award for producing and writing 
          “Harlem Detective” in the early 1950’s for WOR-TV) http://www.bayarearobeson.org/Chronology_7.htm     1953 
          - The first woman to fly faster than the speed of sound, Jacqueline 
          Cochran, piloted an F-86 Sabrejet over California at an average speed 
          of 652.337 miles-per- hour.     1954---Top 
          Hits Wanted - Perry Como Little Things Mean 
          a Lot - Kitty Kallen If You Love Me (Really 
          Love Me) - Kay Starr I Really Don’t Want 
          to Know - Eddy Arnold     1957-The 
          Chicago White Sox and the Baltimore Orioles played a 1-1 tie, a game 
          called precisely at 10:20pm so that the White Sox could catch a train 
          out of Baltimore.  The Orioles’ 
          Dick Williams hit a home run on the game’s last pitch to tie the game 
          and avoid defeat.  The game was 
          replayed from the beginning at a later date, and Baltimore won.     1962---Top 
          Hits Soldier Boy - The 
          Shirelles Stranger on the Shore 
          - Mr. Acker Bilk She Cried - Jay & 
          The Americans She Thinks I Still 
          Care - George Jones     1965 
          -- Outer Space: Gene Roddenberry suggests 16 names -- including Kirk 
          -- for Star Trek Captain. It will never fly say some. And small hand 
          held devices that you can talk as if 
          you are on a telephone anywhere, who would believe it. In the Next Generation 
          they were on the shirt that you could turn on with a touch or vocal command.     1969- 
          Apollo 10  began their orbit 
          to circle the moon ten times.      1969 
          -- The Klamath tribe wins $4.1 million for loss of Oregon lands during 
          fraudulent government surveys in 1880s.       1970---Top 
          Hits American Woman/No 
          Sugar Tonight - The Guess Who Vehicle - The Ides 
          of March Cecilia - Simon & 
          Garfunkel My Love - Sonny James     1974 
          - "The Streak" started a 3-week run at number one on the "Billboard" 
          pop music chart. The novelty tune by Ray Stevens was about people running 
          nekkid where they shouldn’t be nekkid, like, in public. It was the second 
          number one hit for the comedian who made numerous appearances on Andy 
          Williams’ TV show in the late 1960s, as well as his own show in the 
          summer of 1970. His first number one hit, just prior to "The Streak", 
          was "Everything is Beautiful". Both songs won gold records, 
          as did his comedic "Gitarzan", a top ten hit in 1969. Stevens 
          has been the top novelty recording artist of the past three decades.     1978---Top 
          Hits If I Can’t Have You 
          - Yvonne Elliman The Closer I Get 
          to You - Roberta Flack with Donny Hathaway With a Little Luck 
          - Wings It’s All Wrong, But 
          It’s All Right - Dolly Parton     1978- 
          The Buddy Holly Story, a film starring Gary Busey as Holly, has its 
          world premiere in Dallas. The movie will be a critical and commercial 
          success.     1980 
          - 9,677-foot Mt. St. Helens, quiet for 93 years, blew its top. The volcanic 
          blast was five hundred times more powerful than the atomic bomb that 
          leveled Hiroshima. Steam and ash erupted more than eleven miles into 
          the sky and darkened skies in a 160-mile radius. Forest fires erupted 
          around the volcano and burned out of control. The eruption, and those 
          that followed, left some sixty dead and caused damage amounting to nearly 
          three billion dollars. http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Imgs/Gif/Pictograms/may18_sequence.gif     1982 
          Unification Church founder Reverend Sun Myung Moon convicted of tax 
          evasion     1986---Top 
          Hits Greatest Love of 
          All - Whitney Houston Why Can’t This Be 
          Love - Van Halen What Have You Done 
          for Me Lateley - Janet Jackson Ain’t Misbehavin’ 
          - Hank Williams, Jr.     1987 
          - Thunderstorms in Kansas, developing along a cold front, spawned tornadoes 
          at Emporia and Toledo, produced wind gusts to 65 mph at Fort Scott, 
          and produced golf ball size hail in the Kansas City area. Unseasonably 
          hot weather prevailed ahead of the cold front. Pomona NJ reported a 
          record high of 93 degrees, and Altus, OK, hit 100 degrees.     1988- 
          A's Dave Stewart breaks a major league record committing his twelfth 
          balk of the season.     1990 
          - Thunderstorms produced severe weather in the central U.S. spawning 
          a sixteen tornadoes, including a dozen in Nebraska. Thunderstorms also 
          produced hail four inches in diameter at Perryton TX, wind gusts to 
          84 mph at Ellis KS, and high winds which caused nearly two million dollars 
          damage at Sutherland NE. Thunderstorms deluged Sioux City IA with up 
          to eight inches of rain, resulting in a record flood crest on Perry 
          Creek and at least 4.5 million dollars damage.     1991-Gertrude 
          Belle Ellon, co-recipient of the 1988 Nobel Prize in Medicine, became 
          the first woman inducted as a member of the National Inventors Hall 
          of Fame.  Elion’s researched 
          to the development of leukemia-fighting drugs and immunosuppressant 
          Imuran, which is used in kidney transplants.     1992 
          - The CBS season finale of TV sitcom Murphy Brown aired, with the title 
          character, played by Emmy-winner Candice Bergen, giving birth to an 
          illegitimate son. Vice President Dan Quayle publicly lambasted the comedy, 
          saying that the program "glorified" single-parenthood, and 
          that it made a mockery of families with fathers. He went on to comment 
          that "Murphy Brown" lacked the judgment to be a proper role 
          model for young women, and that her actions were immoral. Despite the 
          national unpopularity of his criticisms, Quayle did not back down from 
          his stand against the popular show, providing fodder for many stand-up 
          comics.     1997 
          Tiger Woods wins Byron Nelson Golf Classic     2000- 
          Mark McGwire passes Mickey Mantle into eighth place on the all-time 
          home run career list with 539. 'Big Mac' goes deep three times as the 
          Cardinals beat the Phillies, 7-2.       Stanley Cup Champions This Date        1971---Montreal Canadiens --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Baseball 
          Poem 
 
 Crouching low, I sing 
          the blues The aches are now 
          a part of me Blocking home, I sing 
          the blues 0, the aches are now 
          a part of me Bruises, bumps, and 
          scrapes Have worn me down, 
          can't you see?   My knees sing the 
          blues They sing 'em when 
          I stoop and bend My knees sing the 
          blues 0, they sing 'em when 
          I stoop and bend They crunch, crackle, 
          pop The hurtful noises 
          never end.   My fingers sing the 
          blues When I grip a ball 
          or make a fist 0, my fingers sing 
          the blues When I grip a ball 
          or make a fist The knuckles moan 
          and cry By fire every one 
          is kissed   Crouching low, I sing 
          the blues The aches are now 
          a part of me Blocking home, I sing 
          the blues 0, these aches are 
          now a part of me Too many bruises, 
          bumps, and scrapes I'm nothing like I 
          used to be.   No, nothing like I 
          used to be   
 
 
 | ||||||||||
|  | ||||||||||
|  | ||||||||||
|  | ||||||||||
| 
 | ||||||||||
|   |