Feds dispute ex-PA Cyber chief's claims of illegal attorney-client recordings
The U.S. Attorney's office in Pittsburgh asked a federal judge not to throw out charges against Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School founder Nicholas Trombetta because of claims he made that prosecutors illegally recorded conversations he had with his attorneys, according to a partially redacted filing made public Wednesday.
Trombetta, of East Liverpool, Ohio, faces 11 counts of mail fraud, bribery, tax conspiracy and filing false tax returns. He resigned from the Midland, Beaver County-based PA Cyber, the state's largest cyber charter school, in June 2012.
Prosecutors accused him of funneling at least $1 million in tax dollars meant for the online school to himself and his family. Trombetta said federal investigators used illegally recorded conversations with attorneys to make their case.
“Trombetta's scattershot claims of unwarranted recordings involve implied joint attorney-client relationships which seem to have existed, if at all, only in Trombetta's subjective understanding, and are no basis to accuse the government of serious and deliberate misconduct,” prosecutors wrote.
Prosecutors had asked U.S. District Judge Joy Flowers Conti to keep their response, filed on Monday, confidential. The version released on Wednesday redacts conversations and other details about the case.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.