Sun Journal reports “Bailey passed the Maine Bar Examination in February. Five members of the State of Maine Board of Bar Examiners concluded in a 22-page decision in November that “Mr. Bailey has not met his burden of demonstrating by clear and convincing evidence that he possesses the requisite good character and fitness necessary for admission to the Maine Bar.”
“Four other members of the board wrote a minority opinion in a seven-page dissent. In it, they said that Bailey had demonstrated “by clear and convincing evidence that he has the moral qualifications, competency and learning in the law and has otherwise satisfied the factors established by the Maine Bar.”
Attorney Jens-Peter Bergen, one of the Kennebunk Prostitution case clients charged and pled guilty, knows or should know the law. He chose to commit a criminal or unlawful act that reflects adversely on his honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as an attorney. This is not the only time Atty. Bergen chose to violate the law. He chose to represent the owner of a Maine Realty company, in concert with others including District Court Judge Christine Foster, and aid and abet the theft of my home. Will the Maine Overseers of the Bar take action against him? They’ve protected him thus far!
Attorney Bergen participated as counsel in a case constituting racketeering violations pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 961(F)(1), is enumerated herein with the law applicable thereto:
FRAUD – A scheme was devised by means of false and fraudulent pretenses, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343 and 36 M.R.S.A., 5 M.R.S.A. § 4684, to unlawfully obtain ownership of real estate. The enterprise involved is an “enterprise” as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 1961(4).
EXTORTION – The “enterprise”, conspiring in concert with others, aided and abetted theft and extortion through the commission of state and federal offenses and gained financially by receiving the proceeds and benefits of this extortion in violation of 17-A M.R.S.A. §§ 353, 355 and 18 U.S.C. § 880. This entire “scheme” is a series of RICO predicate acts as 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a) expressly makes conspiracy a predicate act and a crime. The furtherance of these crimes was in violation of 17-A M.R.S.A. §§ 353, 354, 355 and 18 U.S.C. § 1349, 241, 242.
MAIL & WIRE FRAUD – The internet and U.S. Postal service were used by the enterprise/associate” to further extort money in the amount of $35,000 in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343. These were also multiple predicate acts under RICO statutes.
BANK & SECURITIES FRAUD – The “enterprise”/agent involved unlawfully used property, other than his own, as collateral by means of false or fraudulent pretenses and did obtain a mortgage from a bank in the amount of $105,000.00 in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344 and § 1348. The Security Instrument involved, was obtained through unlawful activity and constitutes “racketeering activity” as defined by 18 U.S.C. §1961 and money laundering as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 1956 and § 1957.
Maine’s Attorney General William Schneider and Maine Supreme Court justices have brushed this under the rug!
And F. Lee Bailey is not fit to practice law in Maine?