Radio Interview Focuses Spotlight on Expert Witness Not Allowed to Testify in IRP6 Case
Denver, CO (PRWEB) January 16, 2014 -- During a January 2014 interview on A Just Cause (AJC) Radio, staffing industry expert Andrew Albarelle (Principal Executive Officer, REMY Corporation) shared his expert opinion about the IRP6 case. Court records show that Mr. Albarelle had nearly 20 years experience in the staffing industry at the time of the case and had participated in other government investigations to expose fraud in the staffing industry (Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA, US District Court for the District of Colorado, Oct 6, 2011, and Albarelle Letter to U.S. Attorney John Walsh, July 18, 2011). Court records show that IRP Solutions Corporation executives were accused of defrauding staffing companies, but Albarelle asserts during his radio interview, "There is no difference in what IRP did (normal business practices) than other companies when it comes to debt."
According to court records the IRP6 called Mr. Albarelle to the witness stand as a defense witness during their Oct 2011 trial but Assistant U.S. Attorneys Suneeta Hazra and Matthew Kirsch objected to Mr. Albarelle’s testimony citing procedural violations for notification of expert witness testimony. (Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA, US District Court for the District of Colorado, Oct 6, 2011). Court transcripts confirm that the prosecution argued that they were aware of Mr. Albarelle, but that they did not know that he would be an expert witness. The court transcript shows Ms. Hazra’s argument, “Your Honor, we would object and ask that this witness be stricken. We have not received notice… Moreover, I don't think this witness is qualified as an expert.” (Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA, US District Court for the District of Colorado, Oct 6, 2011).
According to court records Mr. Albarelle submitted a letter to U.S. Attorney John Walsh nearly three months prior to trial citing his credentials and sharing his knowledge of the staffing industry and the IRP6 case. In his letter to Walsh, Albarelle wrote, “I have been in the staffing business for 15 years now, 12 of which as The Remy Corporation’s Principal Executive Officer. I have been the President of the Staffing Industry User Group from 2002 thru 2007 along with being the Co-President of the Oracle Mountain States User Group from 2003-2008. I have been a finalist for Ernest and Young’s Entrepreneur of the year for 2003 and 2004 and have been Honorably Discharged from the United States Military. I have been a member of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s InfraGard for almost 9 years and have assisted the FBI in an investigation of a false network of candidates interviewing (bait and switch) with staffing firms…” (Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA, US District Court for the District of Colorado, Oct 6, 2011). Commenting on AJC Radio, “I was an expert witness in (another) case in the staffing business talking about using contractors for independent work and using contractors that are W2 employees”, recalls Albarelle. “I was able to illustrate that there may be multiple opportunities for multiple people that are independent contractors that may be serving two or three or maybe four different clients on the same day”, added Albarelle commenting on contractors at IRP Solutions having multiple contracts (AJC Radio, 2014).
According to court transcripts Mr. Albarelle was dismissed from the witness stand after stating his name, the company he worked for, and years of experience. “It was one of the most stunning moments that I have ever seen in a courtroom because it followed no judicial processes that I was ever aware of,” affirmed Albarelle speaking of when he was dismissed from the witness stand. Court records show that Judge Christine Arguello sustained prosecution objection and would not allow Mr. Albarelle and one other staffing industry expert witness (Kelley Baucum) to testify. Judge Arguello stated during trial, “If a party fails to comply with Rule 16, the Court may order that party to permit the discovery or inspection, grant a continuance, prohibit that party from introducing the undisclosed evidence, or enter any other order that is just under the circumstances. And that pursuant to Criminal Rule 16(d)(2)(A-D). In selecting the appropriate penalty, the Court should consider the reasons for the delay, the extent of the prejudice as a result of the delay, and the feasibility of curing any prejudice with a continuance.“ (Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA, US District Court for the District of Colorado, Oct 6, 2011).
“From a judicial procedure, if the judge wanted to question my expertise I would have been brought in the chambers," stated Albarelle during the AJC Radio interview (AJC Radio 2014). Albarelle’s statement is corroborated by Federal guidelines for expert witnesses and is addressed by Judge Arguello during trial when she states, “Under Rule 702, the Court must first determine whether the expert is qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training or education to render an opinion. Second, if the expert is sufficiently qualified, the Court must determine whether the expert's opinion is reliable by assessing the underlying reasoning and methodology.” (Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA, US District Court for the District of Colorado, Oct 7, 2011).
Court records show that as part of her ruling denying expert testimony, Judge Arguello directed comments to the IRP6 regarding their pro se status, “That is why you needed an attorney, to know what your obligations are,” chided Arguello. “You all decided to give up your attorney and proceed pro se,” added Arguello. (Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA, US District Court for the District of Colorado, Oct 6, 2011)
“When you read the court transcripts and see where the judge appears to mock the IRP6 for defending themselves pro se, one wonders if there was resentment in the courtroom for men exercising a right that is given by law," ponders Sam Thurman, A Just Cause. “And these comments are made by the judge after not allowing key expert witnesses to testify,” Thurman added.
Court transcripts confirm that Judge Arguello acknowledged that Albarelle’s expert witness testimony was critical to the IRP6 case. “I realize this is critical to your defense, and even though you didn't comply with Rule 16, you at least did submit some sort of report, and that's why I am not excluding it under there, and I am not sure. I am not going to pre-guess whether or not this meets 702,” asserted Judge Arguello (Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA, US District Court for the District of Colorado, Oct 7, 2011).
"This expert witness testimony was critical to the IRP6 case," contends Thurman. According to The Expert Institute, “Expert witnesses…are becoming a mainstay in modern litigation. Experts are brought on to discuss the intricacies of a case, and expert witness testimony helps to clarify the issues of fact for the jury. As different cases continue to utilize expert witness testimony, understanding how experts are brought in, and the issues they are asked to speak on, is critical to discerning how expert witness testimony can impact modern litigation." (http://www.theexpertinstitute.com/expert-witness-testimony-impact-litigation/)
“What occurred that day (Oct 6, 2011) for me as an American and as an American Dream, and the belief as an entrepreneur, to see what transpired really took a lot of the wind out of my sail,” stated Albarelle in closing comments on AJC Radio. “And as it progressed, and progressed, and progressed, it really made me loose faith in the American process,” concluded Albarelle. (AJC Radio, 2014)
The case of IRP Solutions (IRP6) is currently under appeal (US District Court for the District of Colorado, Honorable Christine M. Arguello, D. Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA; Case Nos: NO. 11-1487, Case Nos. 11-1488, 11-1489, 11-1490, 11-1491 and 11-1492). The IRP executives (Gary Walker, David Banks, Kendrick Barnes, Demetrius Harper, Clinton Stewart and David Zirpolo) have been incarcerated for nearly 18 months at a Federal Prison Camp in Florence, Colorado. (Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA, US District Court for the District of Colorado). IRP Solutions Corporation developed the Case Investigative Life Cycle (CILC) criminal investigations software for federal, state, and local law enforcement.
Appellate Court panel includes the Honorable Senior Judge Bobby R. Baldock, Honorable Judge Harris L. Hartz, and Honorable Judge Jerome A. Holmes.
An MP3 of the Andrew Albarelle’s interview is posted at http://www.ajcradio.com. Mr. Albarelle’s letter to U.S. Attorney John Walsh is posted at http://www.freetheirp6.org.
Related press releases: http://www.a-justcause.com/#!press-releases/c21pq
AJC Communications Director, A Just Cause, +1 7192715854, [email protected]
Share this article