In the recent news of former CIA director Dusty Foggo's new indictment, here are snippets of Foggo's alleged sexual companionship:
9. "E.R." was an individual with whom defendant FOGGO entered into a romantic
relationship beginning no later than February 2005 and continuing up to and including part of 2006.
b. Defendant FOGGO misrepresented to others at the CIA the background and experience of Foggo's Friends, including Wilkes, J.C., and E.R. in order to influence the CIA to hire them as contractors or employees and resulting in payments made by the CIA to benefit Wilkes, J.C. and E.R.
e. Through the hiring of Foggo' s Friends, and the maintaining of their roles with the agency, defendant FOGGO derived for himself indirect present and future benefits in the form of meals, gifts, vacations, sexual companionship, the enrichment of a planned future employer, and the enrichment of a mistress.
relationship beginning no later than February 2005 and continuing up to and including part of 2006.
b. Defendant FOGGO misrepresented to others at the CIA the background and experience of Foggo's Friends, including Wilkes, J.C., and E.R. in order to influence the CIA to hire them as contractors or employees and resulting in payments made by the CIA to benefit Wilkes, J.C. and E.R.
e. Through the hiring of Foggo' s Friends, and the maintaining of their roles with the agency, defendant FOGGO derived for himself indirect present and future benefits in the form of meals, gifts, vacations, sexual companionship, the enrichment of a planned future employer, and the enrichment of a mistress.
Sexual companionship = prostitutes
And this tells you that Foggo's future benefits for himself in exchange of bribery was having a mistress on the side while having "sexual companionship."
Here is the court document.
Here is the court document.
1 comment:
Looks like I'll get to see Porter Goss again. He'll have to come back from Canada for a short trip to Court. I hope his male soul mate comes with him for support. With this group you just never know who's with who. It is clear that the case involves corruption within all Government departments. Prostitution was used for favors and because Jean had a legal business with no prostitution they set her up to cover up for the Wilkes case. Now my guess is one or more of the ladies did work for Wilkes as the investigation showed. Jean's ladies did what was ordered on the contact they signed but the Prosecutor knew these few ladies also worked for Wilkes on the side so he used that to force them to lie. But with the help of the Public and the Judge the plan worked. I still can't believe 12 jurors are so knowledgeable to understand Rico and Racketeering charges when Lawyers have to have a class to understand it and even Judges have to read up as it's so complicated part of law. Rico Act was developed for the Mafia and was so hard that John Gotte always won his case. As I watch Reko case the jurors are asking questions and studying exactly what applies to the charges. One might think the Palfrey jurors were fixed in advance with such a quick verdict.
Post a Comment