SPILLING THE BEANS

Dear Sergeant Detective Fodor,

I attempted to send you an email enclosing this follow-up complaint about Robert Franco, Esq. which I sent to the Ethics Committee. The Committee's notion is to stay their investigation until the criminal issues are resolved. Whereas, I believe that your office should and will not leave any unexplored areas open and a thorough investigation takes time, I can't understand why an errant "Attorney" is free to prey upon the unsuspecting, just like he did with the people that you and your office have already taken recorded statements from.

Yesterday, April 27th, Friday, Norman Tauger called me in an upset state and told me that he had just had a conversation with Mr. Franco, where Mr. Franco told him in unequivocal terms, that he is not being investigated in Somerset County. He was arrogant and convincing, and of course, knowing what goes on within the judiciary, nothing will surprise me. Of course, what I see does not belie Mr. Franco's boastful statements. Mr. Franco has conversed with the former Judge, John M. Boyle who is evidenced on a video tape, which I have, talking about his relationship with Mafia figures. Mr. Franco has sought help from Mr. Boyle and referred to it in Ethics papers....what is going on in Somerset County? It is not as if I haven't had enough stolen from me between Judge Gasiorwaski, The DeGuilio Group, the Union County Judiciary and several other turncoat attorneys, why is no one adhering to Title 18? I do not want to put my trust in another lawyer, I want to trust Law Enforcement.

I further realize that there are much greater problems in Somerset County than an attorney who stole $20,000 from a woman, who is preying upon a good-friend, Norman Tauger, gauging attorney fees from whomever is under the gun for a legal issue, etc., but, however, what I do see as emergent is, the issues of two little girls, the Ray sisters, Talia and Ava, being protected and nothing being done about that either .... please, there is far too much of a trail of responsibility for any one to escape guilt at this point. Help those children... documents, pictures, tapes don't lie.... people do. Please acknowledge and validate my concerns.

Again, I respect your time and profession, but don't you truly believe that criminals need to be neutralized? I want to send you evidence of the sexual abuse that is taking place with Ava Ray, a six year old, but I will await hearing from you because the contents are so vile, that even I, an adult am embarrassed. I would hate to have to overcome my embarrassment and take the evidence to the media to expose this but some entity, has got to curtail this neglectful and sinister act of avoidance.

I await your answer.

Respectfully,
Cindy Feiler-Jampel

Begin forwarded message:

From: Cynthia Jampel
Date: April 27, 2007 3:29:37 PM EDT
To: fodor@co.somerset.nj.us
Subject: Robert A Franco

Cynthia Feiler-Jampel
3308 French Drive
Bridgewater, New Jersey
08807
Phone: (908) 393 9353


Attorney Ethics

District X Ethics Committee
Fredric Knapp,Esq.
23 Cattano Avenue
Morristown, New Jersey 07960
(973) 285-1444

RE: X-06-89E
X-06-90E
X-06-91E
X-06-92E
The Law Firm of Franco and Franco
Randi Franco and Robert Franco

April 2, 2007

Dear Mr. Knapp:

I am in receipt of your letter dated March 26, 2007. The contents of the letter simply states the grievances concerning the Law Firm of Franco and Franco has been turned over to the Office of Attorney Ethics, I am assuming that must be a Trenton Office. Please clarify, who is reviewing the case and may I please have contact information.

On another note, in connection with my last letter, I advised that Mr. Franco has a pattern of predatory practices concerning his clients, I was part of a phone conversation which was tape recorded, involving a concerned client telling me the story of Mr. Franco, not too long ago requesting for advance fees because he needed it for cancer treatment. In connection to my previous letter, I know you are familiar with the name Norman Tauger, Mr. Tauger advised that Mr. Franco’s treatment was already performed and covered by insurance. In this conversation, Mr. Tauger and I were both told that Mr. Franco had warned the mother of the client not to tell anyone in the family that he had asked for this money. Mr. Franco knew that if the sister would know this, she would tell Mr. Tauger and the truth would surface.

Mr. Franco’s response to initial complaint

Evidence by tapped conversations

I have been informed that Mr. Franco had been boasting that he has been meeting with a former judge, John M. Boyle for consultation and strategies in defense for the alleged theft, check forgery and Grievance Complaint. I more than believe his covert threats, because he incorporated them in one of his responses, stating that he was going to subpoena Mr. Boyle as a character witness against me. In reference to this threat, Mr. Boyle cannot be a character witness, he can be a material fact witness, which I welcome. This issue should be under further investigation considering that Mr. Franco has contacted the US Attorney’s Office and FBI alleging that Judge Boyle had illicit reasons for his improper ruling in the Matter of Villas on the Park v. Jampel. It is well known that Mr. Boyle’s family is Degnan Boyle Prudential Realtors and that business entity has a relationship with my then adversary.

To further the question of Judge Boyle, he issued a gag order, obstructing fact. This fact was concerning the health and well being of people, relating to the ill health conditions of Villas on the Park. Environmental disclosure is mandated by law. In this particular instance, Mr. Franco was correct, the court obstructed justice and allowed a contaminated site to flourish, as the family of Judge Boyle had a potential for financial profit and gain.

In reflection of Mr. Franco’s boasting about the veil of protection of Judge Boyle, makes perfect sense since the Disciplinary Review Board has two members, John Degnan and Robert Boyle, what is the relationship? By review and name only, there is the appearance of impropriety, coupled with the questionable “untriable status”. My complaint has more than enough ethical substance (putting the alleged criminal issue aside), to compel an “instant investigation”.

I also intend to follow-up with the Matter of RM v. The Supreme Court, to obtain the true meaning of the “Confidential”
inscription across the stationery of your correspondence. Should I find after consulting with Richard Gutman that this is improper, I will consult with Citizens of Justice, John Paff to obtain further redress.

I am looking forward to both your and the Ethics Committee’s
response.

Cordially,





C/c Attorney General Stuart Rabner
Honorable Jon Corzine



HOW PURILE: GROW Up, BOB