These individuals came to my office when the first Grand Jury subpoenas were issued and pleaded with me to settle my cases against Handler so that others would not be placed at risk of prosecution.They stated that if I continued my quest for justice many so-called “innocent” (not Handler) people would be implicated and would face prosecution.They also promised that if I ceased my quest for justice the disbarment proceedings against me would be withdrawn.
 Diana Parker, Esq., of the Morvillo Abromowitz firm had informed Judge Patterson that she represented Samuel Roth and upon a prior occasion represented Bienenfeld and Wertman (one of the many Handler retained firms).In sworn answers to interrogatories, Diana Parker, Esq., swore in May 1999 that her firm had not performed any services in behalf of Emmerich Handler and Rita Handler involving litigations, arbitrations and administrative proceedings in behalf of Emmerich Handler and/or Rita Handler. Subsequently, we discovered evidence that on July 8, 1998 she did perform services for Emmerich Handler and Rita Handler and that when she appeared before Judge Patterson as attorney for Samuel Roth, she had been representing Emmerich Handler.Mr. Roth was simply “running interference” for Handler.That is why Diane Parker did not comply with Judge Patterson’s Order that she furnish us with the documentation relating to the Roth bank deposits, but instead filed them with the court “under seal”, a procedure that was totally unwarranted under Federal Rules.The public can only view these legal gymnastics as an abomination.
 George Weisz, Esq., senior litigation partner at CGS&H, testified at the defamation trial in behalf of Handler – the jury rejected his testimony.