1st Tenet of Journalism
“Bad news is good news, and good news is no news.”
2nd Tenet of Journalism
“Bad news travels fast.
3rd Tenet of Journalism
“Good news often doesn’t travel at all.”
Predictably, my personal experiences have corroborated the above disquieting axioms.
Many accusations have been publicly hurled at me, but I have been found faultless of ALL wrongdoing (although my exoneration has never been reported, much less publicized). Consider this summary: In 1984, the U.S. government and I had disagreements that resulted in litigation and an enormous amount of bad press. I naively offended some very powerful people, and the government attacked me almost simultaneously on six fronts, including two lawsuits and four “inquiries” from federal agencies. These enigmatically concurrent public attacks stunned me like a series of knockout punches, — so much so that I barely defended myself. Regardless, in time, I was completely exonerated. That is, as is documented below, I won total victories as to each and every accusation; interestingly, most were simply abandoned by my accusers. Unfortunately for me, my ultimate vindications have never been made generally known, and some well-intentioned people still harbor the erroneous view that I was convicted of a crime. In that sense, the government “won”; in the law, I did. Simply put, the good news has not traveled at all.
Having been successful in a number of ways and having been retired for over two decades, I haven’t felt the need to wage a PR campaign to justify my exoneration or my life, but, of late, one enemy (after unsuccessfully trying to extort money from me a host of times) hired a judgment-proof “consultant” to publish false “facts” on the Internet, resurrecting the bad news (the false accusations) that I had vitiated and put to rest some thirty years ago, and inventing new and even worse false accusations on the Internet (such as that I was involved in a plot to kill the Premier of Canada, whose name I didn’t even know); these egregious old and new false accusations have made me realize that there are still many people out there who know only the false accusations and nothing about my exoneration. Moreover, appreciating how late it is in life’s curve for me, I don’t want to depart this terrestrial ball leaving my loving, musical-savant-wife (whom I cherish above all else in life), my ethical, hard-working sons, and any of my blithely naive, nascent grandchildren or other venerable family members, to feel the need to defend me in their own words or to document my heretofore unpublicized innocence. So, primarily for these loved ones, I am constrained to set the record straight right here and now.
ACCUSATIONS & EXONERATIONS
The false accusations (lies) are or were: (1) Lee Lovett is a felon. (2) He was found guilty of a crime. (3) He has paid fines to governments. (4) He was found to have violated the rules of one or more government agencies. (5) He was found to have violated SEC Rules and paid a fine. (6) He failed to pay his U.S. income taxes. (7) He is “wanted” by the U.S. (or some other) government. (8) Most bizarre: He was implicated in plots to assassinate public officials and to steal Russian oil. Each of these falsehoods is repeated below and is followed by a factual refutation, with links to documentary evidence to support those facts. The italics within all quotes emphasize words but those emphases were supplied by the person being quoted, not by me.
(1) Accusation: Lee Lovett is a felon. Fact: He is not.
Facts: In the early 1980’s, Lee was accused of the crimes of bribery and conspiracy to commit bribery (two counts each). He was acquitted of those crimes; regardless (1) some newspapers actually falsely reported that he was “convicted of bribery” and (2) neither Lee’s acquittals nor his exoneration were ever published in the press, or on the Internet, until now. Regardless, most people know nothing of Lee’s vindication. His acquittals were part of a Verdict that was recorded only in the records of that Circuit Court, well before computers and electronic publications, and, as of this writing, his exoneration has yet to be digitized and reported on the Internet. As Lee’s Attorney-Gondelman wrote: “The ‘record’ against Mr. Lovett is ‘as if no conviction had ever occurred’. In other words, he was completely exonerated.” See U.S. v. LOVETT | LegalFinalDecisions.com | Legal Opinion of Attorney-Gondleman. and see 2012 Letter of Attorney-Gondelman. “The jury found Mr.Lovett not guilty of bribery and conspiracy to commit bribery…Mr. Lovett was exonerated of all guilt of any wrongdoing…” See U.S. v. LOVETT | LegalFinalDecisions.com | Legal Opinion of Attorney-Plato Chacheris; Court ORDER Vacating Conviction, U.S. v. Lee G. Lovett, No. 87 C 8978, 1988 WL 53246 (N.D. Ill., May 16, 1988 and Court OPINION Vacating Conviction, U.S. v. Lee G. Lovett, No. 87 C 8978, 1988 WL 53246 (N.D. Ill., May 16, 19883.
(2) Accusation: Lee was found guilty of a crime. Fact: He was not.
Facts: Lee was never found guilty of a crime; he was acquitted of all criminal charges, but, rather, as Attorney-Gondelman wrote, “Mr. Lovett, who was acquitted of the primary charges was convicted of something that was not a crime in the first place.” That is, the mailing of benign partnership agreements (in a matter that involved criminal allegations of which he was acquitted) does not constitute a crime. See U.S. v. LOVETT | LegalFinalDecisions.com | Legal Opinion of Attorney-Gondleman; Court ORDER Vacating Conviction, U.S. v. Lee G. Lovett, No. 87 C 8978, 1988 WL 53246 (N.D. Ill., May 16, 1988 and Court OPINION Vacating Conviction, U.S. v. Lee G. Lovett, No. 87 C 8978, 1988 WL 53246 (N.D. Ill., May 16, 19883. “Mr. Lovett was exonerated of all guilt of any wrongdoing.” (Emphasis Cacheris.) See U.S. v. LOVETT | LegalFinalDecisions.com | Legal Opinion of Attorney-Plato Chacheris. If that were not true, Lee would not still possesses his licenses to practice law.
(3) Accusation: Lee has paid fines to governments. Fact: He has not.
Facts: The only fine ever assessed was vacated by the court that imposed it. See U.S. v. Lee G. Lovett, No. 87 C 8978, 1988 WL 53246 (N.D. Ill., May 16, 19883.
(4) Accusation: Lee has violated the rules of the Federal Communications Commission, the U.S. Post Office, the Federal Trade Commission or other governmental agencies. Fact: He did not, nor were any proceedings or even inquiries ever held by any of same.
Facts: There have been no such violations nor findings nor even any formal inquiries by any agency or court related including the FCC, FTC and U.S. Post Office, as attorney and Ambassador Thomas Siebert writes, “Negative articles appeared but, curiously neither adverse rulings nor even inquiries followed from any of those agencies. These were hit and run attacks. Whoever orchestrated them did a brilliant job…Lee’s biggest ‘offense’ was being too successful at what he did.” See U.S. v. LOVETT | LegalFinalDecisions.com | Opinion of Attorney-Ambassador Thomas L. Siebert. As to the SEC, see (5) below. As to the IRS, see (6) below.
(5) Accusation: Lee violated Rules of the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) and paid a fine. Fact: He did not.
Facts: Securities attorney Anthony Djinis writes, “Neither the SEC nor any court ever made any finding that Mr. Lovett violated the federal securities laws. . . No fine or other penalty was ever assessed against Mr. Lovett.” See U.S. v. LOVETT | LegalFinalDecisions.com | Legal Opinion of Attorney-D’Jinis.
(6) Accusation: Lee failed to pay his U.S. income or other taxes. Fact: He did not.
Facts: Lee has never failed to pay any taxes to the U.S. or any other government. As to the IRS, tax attorney-Charles Bruce writes, “In the early 1980’s [virtually simultaneous with the governments other attacks against Mr. Lovett], the IRS instituted a multi-million dollar tax claim against Mr. Lovett. . .roughly 14 years of audit followed by litigation in the U.S. Tax Court . . . [which] resulted in the IRS paying Mr. Lovett a net sum of approximately $30,000. . .The IRS’s multi-million dollar claim proved totally unfounded. . .In my several decades of representing Mr. Lovett, to the best of my knowledge, there have been no other tax disputes, of any kind, with the IRS or with the tax authorities of any government.” See U.S. v. LOVETT | LegalFinalDecisions.com | Legal Opinion of Attorney-Bruce.
(7) Accusation: Lee is “wanted” by the U.S. or other government(s). Fact. He is not.
Facts: Lee has never been listed as “wanted” by the U.S. or any other government. Lee and his wife live a highly visible and high profile life and continue to pay U.S. and other taxes, when the law requires, and the U.S. government (with whom the Lovett’s continue to have ongoing filings) is well aware of Lee’s location and contact data and has “no tax disputes of any kind with the IRS or with the tax authorities of any government. See (6) above and U.S. v. LOVETT | LegalFinalDecisions.com | Legal Opinion of Attorney-Bruce discussing tax filings. In addition, international-immigration attorney, David Lesperance, writes, “If Mr. Lovett were ‘wanted’ by governments or if there were any truth to the accusations, the Interpol checks would have exposed them, and I would be aware of them. In sum, the above-charges are false and ludicrous.” See U.S. v. LOVETT | LegalFinalDecisions.com | Legal Opinion of Attorney-Lesperance.
(8) Most Bizarre Lies: Lee was implicated in plots to (a) assassinate public officials and (b) steal Russian oil. Fact: He was not.
Facts: Attorney-Lesperance writes, “. . .[T]here is absolutely no truth to these charges.” See U.S. v. LOVETT | LegalFinalDecisions.com | Legal Opinion of Attorney-Lesperance. Lee has refused to pay extortionists demands for large sums, in exchange for their promises not to publish negative lies about him online. People can say or write anything on the Internet or anywhere, especially if they are judgment proof and live in another country and/or hire judgment-proof shills to publish lies for them. As to the specific charges: (a) Lee is not, and never has been, involved in politics, anywhere, nor does he know anything about any of the public officials that extortionists have named on the Internet as Lee’s “targets”, past or present. (b) Lee has never been to Russia, knows no Russians, personally, and has never had any dealings or communications, formal or informal, with anyone about Russian or other oil, past or present. His only involvement with oil is through the ownership of the shares of public oil companies.”
In sum, Lee has never been found guilty of any felony, tax deficiency or of violating the rules of any governmental body, but this good news has never traveled at all. Sadly, falsehoods do hurt, because so many of us lack the courage of our own convictions; that is, too often we judge people less by their observable conduct and demonstrable predilections, than by the ill-founded opinions (and bogus accusations) of others, including newspapers that headline convictions for charges that resulted in acquittals and government agencies who “smear and run” — often to aid the large donors who support those in power. It is all too easy to leap to harsh judgments of others. Oddly, by belittling others (psychiatrists say) we mistakenly feel that we elevate ourselves. Such lamentable slights inspired that sublime poet, Alexander Pope, to pen these paraphrased words: “Let me live unseen, unknown; Thus unlamented let me die, Steal from the world and not a stone, Tell where I lie.” All of the foregoing leads us, inexorably, to seek the turtle’s shell to protect us, and they recall an excerpt from the words of this lugubrious ballad, written by none other than my musicologist-wife, Lynda Barnes Lovett (to be found on www.lyndalovett.com or on iTunes):
Opinions of others,
Don’t mean much to me.
Words couldn’t tear us apart.
Being with you is my destiny.
I know what I feel in my heart.
Author’s Post Script
On a more positive note, there are legions of lessons to be learned from the above. (Indeed, sharing the lessons that only time can teach is the paramount goal of this wee website, as set forth in Observations and Book Notes.) Dispelling the foregoing falsehoods is but a collaterally apposite topic, provided primarily to accord solace to, and grist for, my loved ones, because, as to the world, at this late date, “Opinions of others don’t mean much to me.” In sum, I am content to run on my record; however imperfect, I’m proud of it and, at worst, I gave it (and continue to give it) my best shot. If there be a Maker, I shall face same with a smile and without remorse. As I’ve always said, all that I want, and believe that I deserve, for an epitaph is this:
“Lee deserved an ‘A’ for effort,”
and, except in self-defense, it would be fair to add:
“and he never hurt a soul, intentionally.”
The myriad, virtually simultaneous false accusations hurled at me (all in the early 1980’s) have taught me many things, including this:
Sadly, we must be alert to protect ourselves from all governments, because governments are bigger than we are, and history demonstrates (as America’s founders forewarned) that it is in the nature of governments to take increasing amounts of our liberties, inexorably, until revolutions arrest their insidious, execrable seizures; and, whatever titular head is atop whichever government, including the Vested Interests Groups (i.e., the “King Makers” who put the officials in power and keep them there with donations, etc.) are The Government for all practical purposes, and they will use the government as an attack-weapon for their personal gain — as once occurred when I was diverting potential cellular riches from them to average folk. (See link above to Ambassador Siebert’s letter.) Implacably, as Lord Acton sagaciously mused, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Prudence and abundant empirical data thus dictate that we take care not to do anything to offend our rulers, those Strong Men in office, and/or those in their Vested Interests Groups, lest we alienate some of same and become their targets (and victims) and are forced to pay an ultimate price in reputation, wealth, and/or even life or limb — a price that those never similarly attacked cannot be expected to fathom or appreciate. Machiavelli, in his timeless The Prince, graphically documented the force that feudal Princes (i.e., rulers) use, and must use, to seize and retain power, and his template is alive and in use, worldwide, today.
The laconic bottom line is: Never offend those in power or those who put them there – and, as Ambassador Siebert said in his letter (U.S. v. LOVETT | LegalFinalDecisions.com | Opinion of Attorney-Ambassador Thomas L. Siebert), “Never let your light shine too brightly.” He might have added, as goes the axiom, “Forewarned is forearmed.”
For more information on point, see https://legalfinaldecisions.com