1

1 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : : : : :

3 vs. 4 SHANE BUCZEK 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 APPEARANCES: 17 18 19

08 CR 54 09 CR 121 09 CR 141

Arraignment and detention hearing in the above-captioned matter held on Wednesday, May 6, 2009, commencing at 10:12 a.m., before the Hon. H. Kenneth Schroeder, in the United States Courthouse, 68 Court Street, Buffalo. New York, 14202.

GEORGE BURGASSER, ESQUIRE, Office of the U.S. Attorney, 138 Delaware Avenue, Buffalo, New York, appeared for the Government. SHANE C. BUCZEK, appeared pro se.

20 21 22 23 24 25 RECORDED BY FTR GOLD ELECTRONIC RECORDING TRANSCRIBED BY DEBRA L. POTOCKI, RMR, RDR, CRR 843/723-2208

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

THE CLERK: No. 08-CR-54.

United States versus Shane Buczek, Docket Assistant United

This is a status conference.

States Attorney George Burgasser appearing on behalf of the Government, and Shane Buczek appearing pro se. THE COURT: Good morning. Good morning, Your Honor. Good morning.

MR. BURGASSER: THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: evaluation report? THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

Mr. Buczek, did you receive a copy of the

No, Your Honor, nothing.

You did not? No.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

Well, you are certainly entitled to it.

And I'm referring to the evaluation report from the Federal Medical Center in Devens. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: That's correct.

I'm going to have my law clerk make a

copy of the report for you right now, Mr. Buczek, so that you have it. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Thank you.

Am I correct in understanding there's

another indictment right now? MR. BURGASSER: have a copy of that? THE COURT: There is, Your Honor. Does the Court

I have an extra. No, I don't.

3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Honor.

MR. BURGASSER:

Let me bring this up to the Court.

It's a two count indictment. THE COURT: Have you given Mr. Buczek a copy? He does have a copy, Your Honor, and

MR. BURGASSER:

he was also mailed a copy on an earlier date. THE COURT: this one? Is there a criminal number assigned to

Oh, yeah, 09-CR-121. Correct, Your Honor, Judge Skretny.

MR. BURGASSER: THE COURT:

Are you handling this one, or is -Mr. Bruce is handling this, Your

MR. BURGASSER:

He's unavailable, and I am standing in for him for

today's appearance. THE COURT: Let the record reflect that my law clerk

is now handing Mr. Buczek a copy of the evaluation report that was done by the Federal Medical Center at Ayer, Massachusetts, consisting of ten typewritten pages. correct, Mr. Buczek? THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Yes, Your Honor. You have that report,

Okay. Is this our discussion for today? Or

THE DEFENDANT: are we going -THE COURT:

We're going to have to discuss where But I also want to

we're going in the case in 08-CR-54.

arraign you on the new indictment in case 09-CR-121. How are you doing this for docket sheet purposes?

4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 please.

THE CLERK: both numbers. THE COURT: Mr. Buczek?

I'm going to do one docket referencing

So you want to step up to the podium,

THE DEFENDANT: now, right? THE COURT:

So there's a case number for this

Right, it's up on the top, you'll see it. 09?

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

Yes. Okay. Mr. Buczek, you have been

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

All right?

indicted by the federal grand jury for the Western District of New York sitting in the May 2007 term, in the case of United States of America versus Shane C. Buczek, case number 09-CR-121. Have you received a copy of that indictment? Yes, Judge, I received it around

THE DEFENDANT: 7:00 o'clock in Batavia. THE COURT:

Okay. Last night, and I just reviewed it

THE DEFENDANT: last night.

Came at the last minute. The indictment contains two counts. You

THE COURT:

have the right, if you so wish, to have me read the indictment to you, or you can waive the reading of it. THE DEFENDANT: No, I would like you to read it,

5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

THE COURT:

You want me to read it to you. Yes. This is in the case of United Count one, the

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

All right.

States of America versus Shane C. Buczek.

grand jury charges that from on or about September 18th, 2008, to on or about January 16th, 2009, in the Western District of New York and elsewhere, the defendant, Shane C. Buczek, unlawfully, willfully and knowingly executed and attempted to execute a scheme and artifice to defraud, and to obtain the money, funds, credits, assets and other property owned by and under the control of a financial institution, namely, HSBC NA, hereinafter HSBC, an institution which had its deposits insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. That is to say, on or about September 18, 2008, the defendant, Shane C. Buczek, opened a credit account at Best Buy in Hamburg, New York, which account had a credit limit of $3300, and which account was actually a Visa account with HSBC. Thereafter, the defendant used the account to purchase

various items from Best Buy, which purchases approximately equaled the defendant's $3300 credit limit. Then, on or about November 13, November 17, November 24, November 25 and November 28, and again on December 2nd, 2008, in efforts to replenish his line of credit, the defendant contacted HSBC's Check Direct department to pay down his balance, each time by supplying HSBC with the routing number

6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

of Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation, referred to as DTCC of New York City. And an account number of an account in

the defendant's name at DTCC, and directing HSBC to debit that account to pay the defendant's outstanding balance. In truth and in fact, the defendant did not have, and knew he did not have an account at DTCC, and knew that in supplying HSBC with the routing number for DTCC, and an account number for an account at DTCC in his name, the defendant was providing HSBC with false information for the purpose, among others, of temporarily returning his line of credit to or near its $3300 limit, so that he could make additional purchases from Best Buy. Then, following each instance in which the defendant supplied HSBC with DTCC's routing number, and a number of the nonexistent account at DTCC, the defendant made further purchases from Best Buy, knowing that by employing the scheme outlined above, he was enriching himself with Best Buy merchandise, knowing full well that HSBC would never be paid for the defendant's purchases from Best Buy. All in violation

of Section 1344 of Title 18 of the United States Code. In count two of the indictment the grand jury further charges that defendant, Shane C. Buczek, was on release pursuant to an order dated March 13, 2008 from the United States District Court for the Western District of New York, Case No. 08-CR-54, which order notified said defendant of the

7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

potential effect of committing an offense while on pretrial release. From on or about September 18, 2008 to on or about January 16, 2009, in the Western District of New York and elsewhere, the defendant, Shane C. Buczek, did commit the offense of bank fraud in the manner set forth in count one of this indictment, in violation of Title 18 United States Code Section 1344. All in violation of Title 18 United States Code

Section 3147 subdivision (1). Since you are representing yourself, I ask you, Mr. Buczek, how do you plead to these counts in the indictment; guilty or not guilty. THE DEFENDANT: Your Honor, as authorized

representative of the name on the paperwork, and the entity, I'm going to go ahead and ask first for a certified copy of the record, and the grand jury transcripts and the logs from the clerk. grand jury. And I'd like to ask for a signed copy from the And again, I think I might have mentioned this

back in March 14th of 2008, again, I do not accept this offer or presentment, and I don't consent to any proceedings. I

just -- when I received it yesterday at the last minute, it was just -- in a way, I wasn't surprised, but it's just -MR. BURGASSER: THE DEFENDANT: MR. BURGASSER: Your Honor, just's for the record --- amazing. Absolutely amazing.

The letter was sent out on

8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

April 21st, 2009, from Mr. Bruce, with a copy of the indictment. defendant. THE DEFENDANT: night. THE COURT: The point is, you have received a copy of Right here, Judge. I got it last I don't know when it was received by the

the indictment, right, Mr. Buczek? THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: correct? THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: That's correct, yes. So you are now aware that you Yes. That's correct.

And I just read the charges to you,

All right.

have been charged with a two count indictment, as I've read to you. Correct? THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Right.

And how do you plead to those charges,

guilty or not guilty? THE DEFENDANT: at this time. THE COURT: All right, then I will enter a plea of Judge, I object to any type of plea

not guilty on your behalf as to each count of the indictment. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: And I would object to that.

Your objection is noted. Thank you.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

Now, because you are charged with a crime

9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

in this indictment, as well as the crimes charged in the prior indictment in the companion case, you once again have the right to remain silent. You cannot be compelled to answer any

questions, you cannot be compelled to make any statements, because anything you might say, can be used against you. However, you also have the right to be represented at all stages of this case by an attorney. hire an attorney of your choice. And you have the right to

But if you cannot afford to

hire an attorney because of your financial condition, the Court will assign an attorney to represent you. And the cost

for that service will be paid for by the taxpayers of this country. So even though I've just advised you that you do not have to answer any questions put to you by anyone, including me, in order for me to make sure your constitutional rights regarding hiring of counsel and being represented by counsel are carried out, the only way I can reasonably do that is by asking you certain limited questions about counsel. And in doing that,

in asking you those questions, I do not want you to say anything about the case, the charges against you, or make any other comments or statements, other than what is in response to my questions about counsel. Because anything else you

might say, can be used against you. Do you understand? THE DEFENDANT: Judge --

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 mind? choice?

THE COURT:

Do you understand; yes or no. Yes.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

I'm sorry? Yes. Do you plan on hiring an

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

All right.

attorney of your choice? THE DEFENDANT: I do plan on getting counsel when I

get out of here, but at this point I've been in, you know, I've been locked up for four months now for a psych evaluation that I have completed. THE COURT: Mr. Buczek. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: I -I understand. Don't go any further,

Do you plan on hiring an attorney of your

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

Yes, Judge. Do you have an attorney in

All right.

THE DEFENDANT: do much of anything.

I have a few, yes, but I can't really

In fact, I want to let you know that my

family planned on being here, we had about ten people coming today, and we tried to change the date to Monday or Tuesday, but we couldn't do it. And everybody had to leave for an

emergency conference, so that's why there's -- my family's not here today.

11

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

THE COURT: chambers.

Well, your family did contact my

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

Okay.

And your family had been in contact with

my chambers on a regular basis, inquiring as to when you were going to be returned to the Western District of New York and when you would be appearing. And because I felt it absolutely

necessary to schedule your appearance as soon as I knew the Marshal Service would have you here in the Western District of New York, as well as giving the appropriate parties sufficient notice that you were going to be here, I scheduled a conference for today, that being the first available date, so that all of those factors could be taken into account and accomplished. I had that explained to your parents when they called, and indicated to them that it was my obligation to make sure that the matter was not delayed any further, as they had requested, because they were not going to be in attendance, and that it was my obligation to make sure that your constitutional rights were being effectuated, and that you were being brought into court so that you could be advised of your present circumstances, as well as be arraigned on this new indictment, as soon as was reasonably possible. And that's why we

maintained the schedule of today, May 6, 2009. Now, we do have the situation arising out of the other

12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

case, 08-CR-54, wherein and whereby you will recall you had previously been released on bail, subject to certain terms and conditions that I had imposed. But that on January 16th,

2009, the Government had made a motion to have your bail revoked, claiming you had violated terms and conditions of bail that I had imposed. And on January 16th, 2009, in that case, 08-CR-54, I, on my own motion, so to speak, the appropriate legal term being sua sponte, after listening to you and having heard your statements, took it upon myself, as the law allowed under the statute, ordered that the mental evaluation pursuant to Title 18 of the United States Code Section 4241(b) be effectuated. And that was why you then were sent to the Federal Medical Center at Devens. And the report then thereafter was

prepared, a copy of which was given to you this morning. I further, as part of the Government's motion, as well as what had transpired on January 16, 2009, revoked your bail, but reserved your right and the Government's right for reconsideration as to the issue of bail upon your return from that evaluation at Federal Medical Center Devens. We now have the new indictment with totally new different charges in the case of United States versus Shane C. Buczek, 09-CR-121. So the bail issue really is one both in that new

case, as well as the case of 08-CR-54. What's the Government's position, Mr. Burgasser, as to

13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

both cases? MR. BURGASSER: to both indictments. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: And, Judge, I would object to that. Your Honor, we're moving to detain as

You have a right to, Mr. Buczek. I -- the indictment that I got When I was

THE DEFENDANT:

yesterday -- well, first let me back up a second.

detained back on January 16th, I'm sure you probably already looked at my itinerary, all the different locations I've been over the last four months. THE COURT: That's the travel -- logistical travel

system that the Marshal Service utilizes in transporting people who are in detention to take them to the facilities that they're to be delivered to. THE DEFENDANT: of it, that's all. I know, I just want to make a record I

I had no idea what I was looking at.

had no idea I was going to be transferred all over the Northeast. And then when I got to Devens, I was there, I

thought I was going to be there for 30 days, ended up being two months. And I had no idea I was going to be at a county So

jail for two weeks, I had no idea I was going to Ohio.

everything I've been through is -- I mean, I've been under severe duress the whole time. everything. And I've kept my cool about

And now this latest indictment -- and I know, I

know that you -- this indictment is -- it's not valid, Judge.

14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

It's just baffles me.

But I'm not surprised.

I believe I sent you a letter of rogatory, I'm not sure if you ever read it or not, explaining basically if I have standing to even speak as a beneficiary at all. if I do or if I don't. THE COURT: Beneficiary of what? Have you ever had an opportunity to I don't know

THE DEFENDANT: read the -THE COURT:

I read your letter where you were

requesting production of the names of the grand jurors who returned the indictment in 08-CR-54. THE DEFENDANT: And you have never had an opportunity

to read the letter of rogatory? THE COURT: to. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: I have a copy right here, Judge. I don't know what letter you're referring

What's the date of it? April 13th, 2009. Where did you send it to?

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

All right.

THE DEFENDANT:

I sent it to your chambers, and also

William Skretny, Judge William Skretny. THE COURT: It may not have come to me, it may have

gone to the clerk's office, and has not yet been processed up here. THE DEFENDANT: Okay.

15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 night? night.

THE COURT:

I don't know what the status is as far as

what you sent to Judge Skretny's chambers. THE DEFENDANT: But everything in this letter's

outlined, and supports this indictment that's totally invalid. THE COURT: You're talking about 08-CR-54? 09-00121. The latest one.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

All right. I thought he just got that last

MR. BURGASSER:

THE DEFENDANT:

No, this is a letter I sent to the

judge, letter of rogatory. MR. BURGASSER: No, you said in reference to

09-CR-121, which is the new indictment, which you said you just received last night. THE DEFENDANT: MR. BURGASSER: That's correct, yes. So you just sent the letter out last

THE DEFENDANT: on April 13th. THE COURT:

No.

No, no, no, this was sent back

That's the question that counsel for the

Government seems to be raising is, if you claim you just got this new indictment last night, how could you be writing a letter on April 13th about an indictment that you just got last night? THE DEFENDANT: Because when I was arrested back in

16

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

January, it says they might possibly do a superseding indictment. Remember the complaint that they had? I understand. I knew it was coming down the

THE COURT:

THE DEFENDANT:

pipeline, and I says, well, hey, you know, that's why I did a special letter of rogatory to the Judge Skretny and you in your chambers. THE COURT: All right. At that time the case had not

been indicted, on April 13th, as I understand it. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Right. The date of the

Wait a minute.

indictment is April 21st, 2009.

And the case had not been So I would

referred to me until apparently April 24th, 2009.

not have been even notified by the clerk's office as to your April 13th letter, since the case had not yet been assigned to me. THE DEFENDANT: Well, I mailed it to you, and I even

made a copy of the envelope for evidence, too. THE COURT: I'm not questioning that you mailed it.

I'm just saying I have not seen it and I have not taken any action with respect to it. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Okay.

But I did get your prior motion -- I'll

call it a motion, I'm treating it as a motion -- in 08-CR-54, where you were seeking the names of the grand jurors and the

17

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

minutes of the grand jury proceeding, because you claim that the indictment returned in that case is defective. THE DEFENDANT: Right. And I didn't really want to,

you know, argue that, but I want to point out page five of the post settlement closure that was filed back on November 7th of 2008, that was -THE COURT: Now, I don't understand what you mean by

post settlement closure. THE DEFENDANT: Post settlement closure? Well, I

went ahead and got it authenticated and got the two seals from the -THE COURT: indicating -THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: DOJ of the U.S. I saw that, where you got a seal

-- the authenticity of the Department of

Justice and the authenticity of the State Department of the United States. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Right.

But I have to say to you in all candor, I

don't know what either one of those have to do with the case, 08-CR-54. All that those authentications said was that the

signature of the individual from the Department of Justice was an authentic signature, and the signature of Condoleezza Rice at the Federal -- at the United States State Department was authentic. But I don't know what Condoleezza Rice, in her

18

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

capacity of Secretary of State of the United States, and what the position of the individual -- I can't remember whether it was the Attorney General himself or a deputy Attorney General, but what either one of those two authentications had to do with the case. The grand jury indictment, 08-CR-54, as I indicated, when it was returned to me by the grand jury foreperson, and I reviewed it, and I stated for the record that the return and the report submitted by the grand jury, through the foreperson, established to my satisfaction that the appropriate number of grand jurors had voted for the return of the indictment. And my review of the indictment established

that it had been properly executed on behalf of the United States Attorney for the Western District of New York, as well as by the foreperson of the grand jury, and I received it then as a valid indictment. THE DEFENDANT: Are we ever going to be able to get a

certified copy of the record at all? THE COURT: record? THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: I need that, Judge. Why do you need a certified copy of the

For what? To validate the indictment.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: valid.

The indictment has been found to be

I just got finished telling you that.

19

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

All right.

I did that when it was returned to me,

when it was brought to me, and I reviewed the record of the grand jurors concurring in the voting of the indictment. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Okay.

And I reviewed the indictment, and I

found that the indictment had been properly executed on behalf of the United States Attorney, as well as by the foreperson of the grand jury. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Okay.

And that the appropriate number of grand That made

jurors had voted for the return of the indictment. it a valid indictment.

Now, that's not to say you cannot make motions attacking the legal sufficiency of the indictment. For example, but not

limited to, your claim that the charges in the indictment are not properly stated. Or that the charges in the indictment But you have to spell

are defective for some reason or other. that out in a motion.

Once again, as I tried on numerous occasions when you appeared before me, and I'm going to try again this morning, these are complex legal matters and complex legal issues. And

it's because of that, that I told you it would be in your best interest, in my opinion, to have an attorney represent you, rather than you trying to represent yourself, because you do

20

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

not have any training in the law, and that you, as I've indicated to you in the past, are basically trying to walk through a mine field blindfolded. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: And it's very dangerous.

I realize that.

And so I once again implore that you give

serious thought to having an attorney represent you. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: I'm entertaining --

These are serious charges, both in And as I've indicated to you, if you

08-CR-54 and 09-CR-121.

cannot afford to hire an attorney, I will assign an attorney to represent you, so you don't have to be worried about whether you're going to have the money to get an attorney. If

you do not have the money, I will assign a competent attorney who has been certified as one who is qualified to practice in this court and handle these types of cases. THE DEFENDANT: I just want to finish up on that

letter of rogatory I mentioned earlier, if I had standing in this court to be a beneficiary. THE COURT: a beneficiary. I don't know what you mean by standing as

You are in this court as a defendant charged

with crimes under two separate indictments. THE DEFENDANT: And I mentioned before, Judge, I am

the authorized representative of the entity. THE COURT: You can represent yourself under the I told you that in

Constitution of the United States.

21

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

08-CR-54; I'm telling you that now in 09-CR-121. constitutional right to represent yourself. disagreeing with you on that.

You have a

I am not

However, what I am suggesting

to you, as I indicated to you once before, not being trained in the law, trying to represent yourself in a serious criminal case is very very dangerous. And I told you, I used the

analogy, it's like trying to walk through a mine field blindfolded. And that you're not going to be doing yourself

any real benefit, when you could be represented by an attorney who at least is trained in the law and who at least has experience in these types of cases. But, if you so choose to exercise your constitutional right to represent yourself, then you have the right to do so. The choice is yours. So you have standing to be your own

attorney, as a pro se defendant. THE DEFENDANT: beneficiary? THE COURT: I don't understand what that means. But I don't have standing for a

Unless you're trying to say that you're the beneficiary of an indictment, which is a contradiction in terms. You are the

defendant in an indictment, which means the Government has charged you with a crime. THE DEFENDANT: Okay. And have you appointed a

trustee to the case at all? THE COURT: A trustee?

22

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 estates.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

Correct.

No; why would I appoint a trustee? That's what the letter of rogatory

THE DEFENDANT:

and beneficiary claim was all about. THE COURT: We're not dealing with trusts and

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

Okay. Do you

What is the res of the trust?

know what I mean by res, R-E-S?

What is the principal of the

trust that you claim to be a beneficiary of? THE DEFENDANT: trustee, Judge. THE COURT: I'm totally confused. You have to That was the whole purpose of a

explain to me, Mr. Buczek, and I'm not being flip, I just do not understand what you're talking about. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: And I --

I understand trusts, I understand a res I understand what a trustee is, I did take

or a principal of a trust.

and I understand what a beneficiary of a trust is. those courses in law school.

But I don't understand how you

think that applies in a criminal case, wherein and whereby you are a named defendant charged in two separate indictments brought by the United States Government. fund involved here. There's no trust

There's no claim that you embezzled trust What you're charged

funds as a trustee or as a beneficiary.

23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

with is that you have defrauded a bank by using false documents and false information in order to get lines of credit. THE DEFENDANT: indicted. And I believe HSBC should be

Because they're -- Judge, I don't want to get out

on a tangent here, because you know how I feel about everything. But getting back to the original indictment, I -08-CR-54. The newest one, I should say. Sorry.

THE COURT:

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

That's 09-CR-121. Correct, yeah, the newest one.

THE DEFENDANT:

Again, I'm just going to go one more time I'm going to ask for a certified copy of the record, certified copy of the grand jury transcripts that took place to even get this indictment. And again, if we can't get that, then I'm just going to put on the record that I do not consent to the proceedings, and I do not consent to the indictment. THE COURT: All right. That's all. I'm denying your request for

certified copies of the grand jury proceedings at this time without prejudice. I am denying your request for a certified

copy of the record of these proceedings. I am noting for the record, your objection to these proceedings taking place. But nevertheless, I have indicated

and repeat that I am entering a plea of not guilty on your behalf to the two counts contained in 09-CR-121.

24

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Now, how much time do you think you will need to make contact with or have your family make contact with or someone on your behalf make contact with an attorney that you have in mind for purposes of hiring that attorney? THE DEFENDANT: As soon as I can meet with one. I

don't know how much time it's going to be before I even have a hearing to be released. counsel. I need to meet with an attorney or I had no idea this And we

This case is just overwhelming.

was going to blow up into this as of January 16th.

were close to a plea deal, but there's some issues in the plea that Mr. Bruce and I never got -- had an opportunity to talk about. But I do want to get some type of assistance of

counsel. THE COURT: represent you? THE DEFENDANT: me in my defense. THE COURT: I certainly do. I've been telling you If you believe that that would help Do you want me to assign an attorney to

that right from the beginning. standby counsel for you.

In fact, I had assigned

I had assigned the Federal Public

Defender's office to assist you. THE DEFENDANT: knew that. THE COURT: I think it was Mr. Humann. But you You had your Who was that? I didn't -- I never

insisted that you did not want standby counsel.

25

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

own counsel, Mr. Altman, and then you terminated him. THE DEFENDANT: that. THE COURT: I don't want to get into what the Yeah, but there was cause behind

relationship, what the reasons were, I'm merely pointing out that you were represented at one time by counsel of your choice; that was Mr. Altman. Then you terminated him. And

then I had you before me and I indicated to you that you should get new counsel, if you were going to hire counsel, or that I was prepared to assign counsel to represent you, if you could not afford to have counsel. And you indicated to me at

that time that you did not want me to assign counsel. Then I contemplated, and maybe I didn't do it formally, assigning the Federal Public Defender's office on a standby basis, just to be there to give you some assistance. Now, if you want me to assign counsel to represent you, I will assign counsel to represent you in each case, 08-CR-54 and 09-CR-121. However, before I can make the formal

assignment, you must agree and you must fill out a financial affidavit setting forth your financial circumstances, and agree to allow me to place you under oath and question you about your financial circumstances, because that is the only way I can reasonably determine whether you do qualify to have such an assignment of counsel made, because of your financial circumstances. If you do so agree, I will limit my questions

26

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

solely to your financial circumstances, and will not question you about anything else about the case, the charges or anything of any other nature. And I will also instruct you

that I do not want you to say anything about the case or the charges or anything else, and that I want you to limit your answers solely to your financial circumstances. Because once

again, anything else you might say, can be used against you. Now, are you willing to fill out a financial affidavit and swear to its contents as being complete and true, and allow me to place you under oath and question you about your finances, in order for me to determine whether you qualify to have assignment of counsel made? THE DEFENDANT: family first. THE COURT: All right. That's why I was hoping to get this Judge, I'd like to meet with my

THE DEFENDANT: hearing done. THE COURT:

I'm willing to do that.

Now, as I

understand it, and as you indicated, your family have left the area for a trip of some sort. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: It was an emergency conference.

I'm not quarreling with you, I'm just

stating that as I understand it, your family's not available right now. THE DEFENDANT: Right.

27

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 return?

THE COURT: they return.

Okay.

I'm willing to give you time until

But I want you to understand then that nothing

further is going to transpire on either one of these two cases until your family has returned and you have had an opportunity to discuss this matter with them. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Do you understand?

Yes, Judge.

Do you know when they're supposed to

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

In approximately one week.

All right. Yeah.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

Just so you understand then, you will be

detained, that is, you'll be taken back to where they've been housing you, at least for that period of time while we're waiting for your family's return, and then you're going to have to have some time to discuss the matter with your family. And then if your family and you are going hire an attorney, you're going to need some time to make those arrangements. And then I have to be notified that that's been done, and I'll schedule the matter thereafter, so that we can get this case moving. THE DEFENDANT: Okay. Now, we're not going to be

getting into being released at all, or -- because the order -THE COURT: No, because I want you to have the If that's what you are going to do.

services of an attorney.

28

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

The Constitution says you have a right to be represented at all stages of the case. And, therefore, because detention

hearings, which you have a right to, in response to the Government's motion to not let you be released on bail, you have a right to a detention hearing. But a detention hearing And because of

involves legal issues and legal procedures.

that, I suggest to you that you should wait until you have an attorney to represent you, so that the attorney can address those legal issues and those legal procedures on your behalf. THE DEFENDANT: So no entertainment of bail at all,

because I've completed the psychological evaluation? THE COURT: The issue of bail is now totally related It is not related to the

to other factors and elements. psychological evaluation.

The issue of bail now is whether

there are terms and conditions that I could impose that would ensure your compliance with the terms and conditions of bail, that would ensure to a reasonable extent that you will not go out and commit further crime, allegedly, or to ensure that you will appear in court when you are scheduled to appear in court. In other words, that you will not flee.

Those are the issues that will have to be addressed for purposes of bail. Now, as you already know, back on January 16th, 2009, the Government moved to revoke your bail in 08-CR-54, claiming that you violated the terms and conditions of bail set in that

29

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

case, by your actions in going out and allegedly defrauding Best Buy in the purchase of the flat screen TVs, the washers and dryers and so forth, which are the subject matter of this new indictment in 09-CR-121. And that's why the Government

moved to have your bail revoked. I was addressing that issue on January 16, 2009, when you made your statements to me about this fund you claimed existed and this administrator in Texas that you claimed you had, if I recall correctly, a $2 billion account upon which you, under the United States Treasury Regulations were entitled to draw upon. And as you had gone into great detail about that

so-called fund that you said entitled you to draw upon, because of your social security number, that I had concerns about -THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: My psychological evaluation. And

Your psychological evaluation.

that's why I, sua sponte, then asked for and directed that there be such an evaluation done. We now have that completed.

We are now going to go forward on both cases, 08-CR-54 and 09-CR-121. We are at this stage, this threshold stage of I am giving you and your family the

counsel representation.

opportunity to discuss and to take steps within which to hire an attorney of your choice, that being your constitutional right, if that's what is going to be done. If that is not

what is going to be done, and you come to that conclusion

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

after you have had an opportunity to confer with your family, you will then have to consider whether you are going to ask the Court to assign an attorney to represent you. And if you

are going to do that, you must then fill out a financial affidavit, swear to its contents as being complete and true, and allow me to place you under oath and question you about your financial circumstances. If that does occur, and I

determine that you do qualify financially to have an assignment made, I will then appoint an experienced, competent attorney to represent you in both cases, 08-CR-54 and 09-CR-121, so as to effectuate your constitutional rights to be represented at all stages of both cases. If such an assignment is made, then, after that attorney has been assigned, I will bring you and that attorney back with the Government's attorney in order to discuss the scheduling of a bail hearing in both cases, 08-CR-54 and 09-CR-121. In addition to discussing the bail issues in both cases, that attorney, in your presence with you here in court and with the Government's attorney here, we will also address putting in place a scheduling order in both cases. Scheduling

order being deadlines for when motions are to be filed on your behalf, when responses to any motions filed must be made by the Government, and my scheduling argument of those motions. THE DEFENDANT: Judge, if I proceed as I have been

31

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

proceeding, and that was one of the issues I had with Mr. Altman, is our discovery issues. Will we ever ever get

discovery in the original case that we put a bill of particulars in way back in the springtime of 2008, still no answer on that. I'm afraid to even put any motions in,

because they're going to be denied, like Mr. Altman told me. He said it doesn't matter what you put in here, they're all going to be denied. THE COURT: I said, wait a second. I don't want you to disclose your If you get an

conversation with your prior attorney.

attorney, either an attorney you hire of your choice or I end up assigning an attorney, we will then address those issues. And yes, you will have the right to make motions for discovery. In fact, there will be a procedure in which I will

direct the United States Government, by its attorney, to provide voluntary discovery material to your attorney. both cases. In

And then we will also set a scheduling order as

to when motions must be filed, when motions must be responded to and when motions will be argued. But I can't do anything

right now in that regard until I know what the situation is going to be as far as attorney representation. Because those

are your constitutional rights, your constitutional right to hire an attorney of your choice. If you exercise that right,

then you need time to talk to your family and you need time to work out the arrangements with the attorney to retain that

32

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

attorney.

And I'm going to give you that time.

If it turns out, after you've had discussions with your family, that you are not going to be in a position to hire an attorney of your choice because of the financial circumstances, I will then allow you to make application to the Court to have the Court assign an attorney to represent you, provided you fill out a financial affidavit, swear to its contents as being complete and true, and agree to allow me to question you under oath about your finances. If I find that

based on that information that you do qualify, I will then assign the attorney. And as soon as I get the attorney

assigned, I will schedule a matter back here in court, and we will then move forward on all of these issues of bail, detention, discovery motions and any other motions. THE DEFENDANT: The Government has already said

they're going to deny my bail, is that correct? THE COURT: The Government has made a motion asking Under the statute, they have a right to

that you be detained. do that.

The substance of that motion is the Government says

you should not be released on bail because you do not comply with terms and conditions of bail when they are imposed. Because the Government alleges, as they have now done in this second new indictment, while you were on bail in 08-CR-54, you went out and committed more crimes. THE DEFENDANT: Right. That's their allegations.

33

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 here.

THE COURT:

You are presumed innocent of those

charges, just as you are presumed innocent of the charges in 08-CR-54. motion. But the Government has the right to make that

In response to that motion, you have a right to a And as I've indicated to you, a detention And

detention hearing.

hearing does involve legal issues and legal procedures.

in my opinion, you would be at a disadvantage to go to that hearing and represent yourself. That you would be better

served to have that hearing with an attorney representing you, a person who is trained in the law, who is familiar and experienced in these kinds of things, to represent you at that hearing. The hearing will be conducted, and then it will be

for me to decide whether I should grant the Government's motion or I should deny the Government's motion, and release you on bail with terms and conditions, as I did in 08-CR-54. THE DEFENDANT: I know. Last thing is the -- I mean,

obviously we're not going to be entertaining bail today, it looks like. THE COURT: Well, the Government's made the motion. They made the motion, but it's

THE DEFENDANT:

something that you're not going to entertain talking about today? THE COURT: No, because you don't have an attorney

THE DEFENDANT:

So what if I proceed -- proceed for

34

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

bail today? THE COURT: No. Okay.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

I'm not going to do anything further

today, because I am honoring your request to have time to talk to your family -THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Right.

-- about whether you are going to be able

to hire an attorney or not. THE DEFENDANT: Right. But the whole purpose of I can't do that

meeting with my family is for me to get out. until I get out. THE COURT:

But you told me that you would be

discussing with your family whether they are going to be able to assist you in hiring an attorney. THE DEFENDANT: Right, when I get out. I can't do

that sitting behind -- over there in Batavia, Judge. THE COURT: Your family isn't even here. Right, that would give me more time

THE DEFENDANT:

to get on the phone and communicate with other counsel out there. I can't do anything from sitting in a jail cell, being You're paying $2 a minute for

on these ridiculous phones. these things. THE COURT:

All I can say, Mr. Buczek, is your family

was aware that you were going to be appearing here in court

35

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

today. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Right.

Your family had the opportunity to be Your

here, had the opportunity to confer with you today. family chose to do otherwise. that. THE DEFENDANT: Okay.

I can't be held responsible for

So we're not going to

entertain -- Could I go forward with the bail hearing right now? THE COURT: No. Okay.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

Only because you do not have an attorney

here to represent you; and, the Government is entitled to have three business days within which to prepare for such a hearing, under the statute. THE DEFENDANT: Okay, Judge. I was wondering if

the -- the last thing I had that I wanted to get into was the ratification of commencement on the not guilty plea. THE COURT: I don't know what that means, I entered a plea of not guilty

ratification of commencement. on your behalf. me doing that. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

The record will reflect that you objected to

Right.

But nevertheless, your plea imposed by And I've done that because

this Court is one of not guilty.

36

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

that's another way for me to effectuate your constitutional right to presumption of innocence. You are presumed innocent

of these charges throughout this entire case, until such time as your guilt has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, based on legally competent evidence received in a trial. So by my

entering with your plea of not guilty on your behalf, over your objection, I have done nothing more than put in play, put in force, in effect, your constitutional right of presumption of innocence. THE DEFENDANT: still locked up? THE COURT: That's on the issue of bail. Right. So if I'm presumed innocent, why am I

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

The law also says even though a person is

presumed innocent of the crime within which they are charged, if there are facts and circumstances as alleged and put forth and proffered by the Government, that indicate that that person might constitute a danger to the community or members of the community, or that person might flee, or that person might continue to commit acts of criminal nature, the law says that person then can be detained until such time as the trial on the charges are held, or is held, and a result reached. THE DEFENDANT: MR. BURGASSER: Okay. Your Honor, just so the Government's

clear, it's my understanding at this point that the defendant

37

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

is requesting time to find out if he wants an attorney, as opposed to going forward pro se at this time. THE COURT: And that --

It's my understanding that Mr. Buczek

wants time in order to meet with his family to discuss whether his family and Mr. Buczek are going to be able to retain an attorney of his choice. And that if they are going to be able

to retain an attorney of his choice, then they need time to actually hire the attorney. That if it should be decided

after Mr. Buczek has had an opportunity to confer with his family, that they are not going to be able to hire an attorney, because of financial circumstances, Mr. Buczek is then going to have to make a decision if he is going to ask the Court to assign an attorney to represent him, by filling out a financial affidavit, swearing to its contents as being complete and true, and agreeing to allow me to question him under oath about his finances. THE DEFENDANT: I still have that right to proceed

and represent myself, is that correct? THE COURT: You do have that constitutional right. Okay, Judge. And, you know, the

THE DEFENDANT:

whole issue is that I was under the understanding that the 30 days was the longest I was going to be detained. THE COURT: I extended the 30 days because Devens,

the Federal Medical Center, said they needed more time to complete its evaluation of you, and I felt that that

38

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

evaluation was also in your benefit, and, therefore, I granted that extension of time. Because, quite frankly, if they were

to find that you were not capable of assisting in your defense, I didn't want you to be deprived of that opportunity for such a finding to be made. I did not want you to have to

go forward to face these serious criminal charges, if the professionals felt that you were not able to properly assist in defending against those charges. So because I wanted to

make sure you were given every benefit that the Constitution allows, and that you were not railroaded in any way, and that you were not rushed to judgment in any way, I agreed to extend the time so that the professionals could complete their work. And as you find from the report, they did prepare a final report and -THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Right.

-- they made a finding. Are we having a hearing on that, or

THE DEFENDANT: has that just been -THE COURT:

No, there's no need for a hearing because

they have found that you are competent and you can assist in your defense. THE DEFENDANT: Okay. I haven't even seen it yet. I

have not had an opportunity to review it or anything. THE COURT: Well, that's the finding. The finding is

that you are competent to stand trial.

39

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

THE DEFENDANT: report then? THE COURT:

Okay.

So you did read the whole

I did. Okay. I haven't yet.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

I understand. Okay. And that's why I

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

But I did read it.

scheduled this matter for today. THE DEFENDANT: Okay. Okay. I just want to make a

record that it was my understanding after the 30 days is complete, 30 business days -THE COURT: I sent you notice and I sent you a copy

of my order extending the time. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Right.

So you got that. Right.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

Okay. I did get that, but it was my

THE DEFENDANT:

understanding that once this is complete, okay, it says in the order that once this is complete, that the defendant can be released. THE COURT: Didn't say you would be released, because

we go back to the date of January 16th -THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Right.

-- 2009, when the Government moved to

40

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

revoke your bail. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Correct.

On the basis, as the Government has

alleged, while on bail in 08-CR-54, you went out and committed further crimes. And that's what is now reflected in the But I'm telling you, we're going to

indictment 09-CR-121.

have a hearing on that. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Okay.

But I'm giving you the opportunity to be

represented by an attorney in having that hearing. MR. BURGASSER: Also, just for the record, I believe

you noted that on that previous date on 08-CR-54, the Government did make a bail motion to detain. sorry, to revoke. THE COURT: To revoke. And it was revoked at that time. But Bail was -- I'm

MR. BURGASSER:

he was allowed to renew it, which he's doing on today's date. He's renewing your motion. THE COURT: That's correct. I revoked the bail with

the -- reserving the right of the defendant, Mr. Buczek, to readdress the issue of bail upon his return when he was brought before the Court and had counsel to represent him. THE DEFENDANT: Judge, I guess I am competent, I If I am competent --

didn't know that, you just told me. THE COURT:

Competent to understand the proceedings

41

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

and to assist in your defense. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Correct.

That's not to say that you are competent

to represent yourself -THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Okay.

-- in these serious criminal matters. So you believe that I can't represent

THE DEFENDANT: myself? THE COURT:

I didn't say that.

I do have

reservations, I do have serious doubts about your representing yourself on complex legal issues for which you have no training. And once again, to me, it's equivalent to you

trying to walk through a mine field blindfolded. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Okay, Judge.

You would be better served, in my

opinion, to be represented by an attorney, a person trained in the law, a person experienced in the law, in these kinds of cases. But I'm not saying you cannot represent yourself. Do

Because the Constitution says you can represent yourself. I think it's wise for someone to represent themselves?

No.

Do I invoke the old adage of Mark Twain, "The person who represents himself has a fool for a client."? THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Yes.

What about Thomas Jefferson?

What about Thomas Jefferson? Thomas Jefferson said it's the right

THE DEFENDANT:

42

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

of the people to represent themself. THE COURT: I said that. The Constitution says you

can represent yourself. decision?

But does it mean it's a wise I'm not telling you, you can't

I don't think so.

represent yourself.

I'm merely trying to give you some sound

advice based on 40 years experience of practicing law, and almost nine and a half years as a sitting judge, that in my opinion, a person who is not trained in law, who is charged with serious crimes, is running a very very serious risk in trying to represent himself or herself. And that in doing so,

and if convicted, you, in this case, could end up facing serious time in prison. should not take. And to me, that's a gamble that you

Especially when I'm telling you that I'm

willing to assign an attorney to represent you, if you can't afford an attorney. THE DEFENDANT: Which leaves me to, again, when is

our next date we're going to have the bail? THE COURT: The next date will be as soon as I find

out from you that you've hired an attorney of your choice, as the Constitution says you can do; or, if you tell me that you cannot afford to hire an attorney and that you are asking me to assign an attorney; or, you tell me that you're not going to do either one of those things and you're going to insist on representing yourself. THE DEFENDANT: Okay. And when would that date be

43

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

set for a bail hearing? THE COURT: things. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Well -As soon as you tell me one of those three

We're back to where you told me you I said I was going to

needed some time to meet your family. give that you time. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: away for a week. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Right. Right.

And you told me your family's going to be

So we're not going to have the hearing

for at least a week, because I'm going to let you meet with your family. THE DEFENDANT: And the Government needs three days

to put a motion together to deny my bail? THE COURT: They don't -- the Government is entitled They made the

to three days to prepare for the hearing. motion. MR. BURGASSER:

We'll be ready to run the hearing in If he's going to

three days, if he's representing himself.

get an attorney, as the Court said, we have no problem going along with the adjournment for him to discuss it with his family and to make that final decision. THE DEFENDANT: I can discuss it over the phone,

44

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Judge. THE COURT: All I'm saying is I'm going to give you

as much time as is reasonably necessary for you to confer with your family. You told me they're away for a week. Right. I was --

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

I'm willing to give you a week, I'll give

you ten days, I'll give you two weeks. THE DEFENDANT: Right, but I understand that, but I

had no idea -- I had no intentions I was going to be detained even longer than four months. THE COURT: Well, you have been. Yeah. Now the question is,

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: we're going forward. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

So that's a fact.

Right.

Do you want a week, do you want ten days,

do you want two weeks in order to meet your family, discuss with your family attorney representation, time within which to hire an attorney, if that's what the decision is, and then we'll bring you back with the attorney you've hired; or, do you want a week or ten days or two weeks to meet with your family and come to a decision that the financial circumstances are such that you cannot hire an attorney, and that you're asking the Court to assign an attorney, I will bring you back and you will fill out the affidavit and I will examine you.

45

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

And I will tell you this right now, I will have an attorney here present on that day. If I find that you qualify

financially, I will immediately assign that attorney to represent you, so there will be no further delay. THE DEFENDANT: soon as possible. THE COURT: I told you that I would be willing to I would like to entertain bail as

entertain bail as soon as I know what the attorney situation is. Or, if you're going to insist, then I'll schedule the But I'm

bail hearing, if you're going to represent yourself.

telling you, if you're going to represent yourself in the bail hearing, which involves legal issues and legal procedures, you're going to put yourself at a disadvantage. THE DEFENDANT: hearing on the bail? THE COURT: Do you want a hearing on bail So when is the soonest we can have a

representing yourself, or do you want a hearing on bail with an attorney to represent you? THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: By myself, Judge.

All right.

(Brief interruption in proceedings.) THE COURT: now? THE MARSHAL: THE COURT: Batavia detention facility. We can do it on Thursday, May 7th, Where's Mr. Buczek being housed right

Okay.

46

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

at 10:30.

That's tomorrow. They're going to come pick me up

THE DEFENDANT: tomorrow? THE COURT:

They'll take you back to Batavia today

and they'll bring you back tomorrow. MR. BURGASSER: THE COURT: What time is that, Your Honor? Now, are you expressly waiving

10:30.

your right to be represented by an attorney tomorrow, May 7th, 2009, for purposes of this detention hearing? THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Yes, Judge.

And you understand that I'm willing to

give you time within which to hire an attorney of your choice. Do you understand that? THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Well, it will give me time --

Do you understand that? Yes, Judge, I do.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

And nevertheless, you are asking that you

want to go forward with the detention hearing tomorrow without an attorney, you want to represent yourself. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Is that correct?

That's correct, Judge. And you understand that I'm

All right.

willing to give you time to fill out a financial affidavit and to ask the Court to assign an attorney to represent you, and I will have that attorney, if I find you qualify to have an attorney assigned, here to represent you in the bail hearing;

47

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

but you are waiving that as well? THE DEFENDANT: You're saying you would have an

attorney sitting here tomorrow? THE COURT: If you fill out a financial affidavit.

If you fill one out right now, and you agree to allow me to question you under oath about your financial circumstances, after you fill out that financial affidavit, and if I find that you qualify financially to have an attorney assigned to represent you, I will have an attorney here tomorrow morning to represent you. And, that attorney will represent you

throughout the rest of the cases, that is, in 08-CR-54, and 09-CR-121. I will have that attorney here tomorrow. If you

qualify financially. THE DEFENDANT: Okay. Again, I'm going to go ahead

and proceed by myself tomorrow, and I'll make the necessary phone calls from Batavia, and I'll be here tomorrow at 10:30. THE COURT: So you're waiving your right to have an

attorney represent you tomorrow? THE DEFENDANT: rights. THE COURT: All right. Are you going to be here Well, I'm actually reserving all my

ready to go forward tomorrow, or are you going to ask for an adjournment because you want to get an attorney? THE DEFENDANT: possible. I need to get out as soon as

I need to go ahead with the bail hearing and have

48

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

you make a decision on that. THE COURT: yourself? THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Yes, Judge. I want to make sure that you And you want to do that representing

All right.

fully understand that I am trying to give you every opportunity to be represented by an attorney in this detention hearing. Be it an attorney that you hire of your own choice,

which is your constitutional right, or be it an attorney that I will assign to represent you because of your financial circumstances. That you are knowingly and voluntarily telling

me that you do not wish to delay this detention hearing for purposes of your getting counsel or having counsel assigned. And that instead, you are asking that that hearing be held tomorrow, May 7, 2009 at 10:30 a.m., and that you're going to represent yourself. Is that what you're telling me? Yes, Judge.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

All right. And again, getting back to this brand

THE DEFENDANT:

new indictment that I received last night, it says count two, there was a violation of my conditions of release. THE COURT: That's right. Okay. Now, if we refer back to the

THE DEFENDANT:

docket, back in October of 2008, I did do a rescission and revoke of signatures of the condition of release back in

49

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

October.

I found out in late December, around Christmastime, So I had to refile

I found out it never even made the docket. a second time.

Remember it was on docket sheet, a rescission

and revoke of signature? THE COURT: I remember that, but -Right.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

-- to this day I still don't understand

what you're talking about. THE DEFENDANT: Because there's been no discovery met And I -There's been no discovery

in the very first indictment. THE COURT:

I know it.

because you had Mr. Altman representing you, and then Mr. Altman was fired by you. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: discovery. Right.

And Mr. Bruce had offered to give certain

And then you told me you and Mr. Bruce were in And then you told me that the plea

plea negotiations.

negotiations broke down. THE DEFENDANT: Almost, yeah, they did break down.

But, you know, that's where I don't understand where count two is coming from. There's no agreement. That's a matter that will be subject to a

THE COURT: trial.

MR. BURGASSER:

Your Honor, in reference to the new

date that's being set for tomorrow, could I just ask that the

50

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

speedy trial time be excluded under 31 -THE COURT: It is going to be excluded, only because

there's a motion pending by the Government pursuant to Title 18 of the United States Code Section 3161(h)(1)(D), and in the interests of justice, because I'm trying to give the defendant as much of the benefit as I can give him in order to effectuate his constitutional right to be represented at all stages of this case by an attorney, be it an attorney of his choice or by assigned counsel. And, therefore, that time is

justifiably excluded and is hereby so excluded for purposes of the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions contained in Title 18 of the United States Code Section 3161(h)(7)(A) and Title 18 of the United States Code Section 3161(h)(7)(B)(4). THE DEFENDANT: Judge, it's my opinion under Title 28

U.S.C. Section 638(c), all orders must have an official seal on that, and I believe you did receive my letter, or maybe the clerk -THE COURT: I did, and I denied that. And I wasn't trying -I'm not criticizing you.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

I understand.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

I wasn't trying to start an argument.

I'm not criticizing you, Mr. Buczek, all

I said was that I do not agree with you that all orders have to be in writing and have a seal on them.

51

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: District Court. THE DEFENDANT:

No, that's what it says in the books.

You can raise that on appeal to the

The search warrant, the arrest

warrant, the raid at the house on January 16th, I mean, it goes on and on and on. THE COURT: I understand. Those are all subject to

motions to be made at a later date. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Okay.

You've got to do it a step at a time in The next step we're going to do is

an orderly procedure.

tomorrow, May 7, 2009, when we're going to hold the detention hearing on 08-CR-54 and 09-CR-121. And you told me you're

going to represent yourself and that you are waiving your right to be represented by counsel, either counsel of your choice or assigned counsel. THE DEFENDANT: court then? THE COURT: Pardon me? Public policy? And public policy is denied in this

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

Public policy what? That was the whole conclusion of the

THE DEFENDANT:

case for the very original case, public policy, post settlement closure. THE COURT: I don't understand that.

52

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 allows.

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

UCC 6

-- 3603?

The Uniform Commercial Code has nothing

to do with the Bail Reform Act. THE DEFENDANT: All I want to know is if public

policy is going to be accepted in this court or it's not going to be accepted, that's all, so I know what direction to go down here. THE COURT: What will be accepted is what the law

THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

Right.

We are going to proceed tomorrow under Title 18 of the

the Bail Reform Act of 1984 as amended. United States Code Section 3161. THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT:

What about public policy? I mean, What

Public policy is public policy.

there's public policy that covers all kinds of things.

we're going to be operating under is the Constitution of the United States and the Bail Reform Act of 1984 and the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. MR. BURGASSER: THE DEFENDANT: THE COURT: Thank you, Your Honor. Thank you, Judge.

In the meantime then the defendant is

remanded to the custody of the U.S. Marshal Service until further order of the Court. THE DEFENDANT: Thank you.

53

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

THE COURT:

You're welcome.

(Court adjourned at 11:18 a.m.)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION

I, Debra L. Potocki, RMR, RDR, CRR, Official Court Reporter for the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct transcript of the electronically recorded above proceedings, to the best of my ability.

S/Debra L. Potocki _______________________________ Debra L. Potocki, RMR, RDR, CRR

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful