Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 1 of 35

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------------------------------- X
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

10 Cr. 228 (LTS)

-againstANNETTE BONGIORNO,
Defendant
-------------------------------------------------------------- X

SENTENCING MEMORANDUM OF ANNETTE BONGIORNO

SERCARZ & RIOPELLE, LLP

810 Seventh Avenue, Suite 620
New York, New York 10019
Telephone: 212-586-4900

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 2 of 35

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Defendant Annette Bongiorno (Mrs. Bongiorno or Bongiorno) respectfully submits
this memorandum in aid of her sentencing. Although the Presentence Report (PSR) includes a
description of Mrs. Bongiornos background and the offense, we submit this memorandum to
provide additional detail regarding these matters, so that the Court will have a fully nuanced
picture of Mrs. Bongiorno and her conduct when it imposes its sentence on her.
Because of the length and complexity of the PSR and the length of the trial in this matter,
we will not quibble with every factual detail or allegation which Mrs. Bongiorno contends is
erroneous or with which she disagrees. Many of the issues which Mrs. Bongiorno wishes to
raise can be dealt with in a general way, and we will recall to the Courts attention some of the
testimony at the trial of this matter which is informative on sentencing issues. Ultimately, the
Courts understanding of the facts, shaped by its observations of the trial witnesses and Mrs.
Bongiornos own testimony, will guide it in determining a just sentence.
For the purposes of this proceeding we accept the fact that Mrs. Bongiorno has been
convicted of participating in the largest securities fraud in history, and we accept that her
sentencing guidelines recommend a sentence of life, which would mean that she must be
imprisoned until she dies. But, for all the reasons stated below, we argue that Mrs. Bongiorno
should not be sentenced to a term of life imprisonment, and that a sentence of approximately 8 to
10 years is appropriate.
The core issues here are simple and stark: should this defendant be denied any possibility
of completing a prison term and reuniting with her family and friends? Is she so thoroughly
irredeemable as a person that she should be denied any possibility of re-entering society? As the
Court knows from the Probation Departments recommendation of 20 years imprisonment, the

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 3 of 35

Probation Department does not believe that a life sentence is appropriate in this case. We
agree with that assessment, and we believe the Court will agree with that assessment too, after
considering the evidence produced at trial and the defendants personal history and
characteristics as described in this memorandum.
As we argue below, a just sentence is one that strips Mrs. Bongiorno of every asset she
owns, and that imposes a term of years that may well amount to the life sentence
recommended by the guidelines, given Mrs. Bongiornos age, health and life-expectancy.
However, we also argue that a just sentence should permit Mrs. Bongiorno a chance of release,
given who she is, and the real nature of the role she played in the deplorable schemes at Madoff
Securities. A sentence of 8 to 10 years of incarceration will accomplish this, even though she
may not live long enough to complete such a sentence.
For all the reasons stated more fully below, we respectfully submit that a sentence that
includes a term of incarceration between 8 and 10 years in length is an appropriate one for Mrs.
Bongiorno.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
A. Ms. Bongiornos Personal History and the Nature of Her Character
As the PSR notes, and as the proof at trial established, Mrs. Bongiorno was born into a
working class Italian family, and was raised in Brooklyn and Queens. PSR 129-30. Mrs.
Bongiornos upbringing was old fashioned. Tr. 10,184. Her parents raised her to be loyal,
generous and hard-working, with a focus on extended family and friends. PSR 131. Mrs.
Bongiorno has described her childhood as wonderful, and she continued to live at home long
after she became an adult. PSR 130. When she finally moved out of her parents home at age
28, they were upset by her decision to do so. PSR 130.

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 4 of 35

Mrs. Bongiornos formal education did not extend beyond High School. PSR 145. She
first went to work at Madoff Securities when she was just 19 years of age, and spent almost her
entire career at Madoff Securities. PSR 150. She never received any training or education in
the securities industry apart from what she learned on the job. Mrs. Bongiorno never obtained
any license associated with the securities industry, and never received any sort of informal
training outside of Madoff Securities. Tr. 10,203.
As the foregoing discussion indicates, Mrs. Bongiorno was a nave young woman when
she went to work at Madoff Securities, for whom loyalty and generosity were paramount. At the
firm, Mrs. Bongiorno became attached to those who worked with her, and Madoff Securities
became more than a job for her, because she worked with so many long-term friends. In fact,
two of Mrs. Bongiornos former colleagues, Joann Sala and Angela Celentano, have written to
the Court to emphasize the good qualities in Mrs. Bongiorno they came to know during the time
they worked with her, many years ago. According to Ms. Sala, [t]here is nothing she would not
do for her family and friends, and Mrs. Bongiorno was always the first one to give a gift when
a baby was born, when someone got married, birthdays and Christmas Her family and friends
meant everything to her. Letter of Joann Sala, attached as Exhibit A. And Angela Celentano
notes that, despite Mrs. Bongiornos conviction, I consider Annette a friend for life, someone I
could always count on no matter what distance is between us and someone with a warm and
generous heart. Letter of Angela Celentano, attached as Exhibit B.
Moreover, as the Court knows, Mrs. Bongiorno is the person who got her neighbor, Frank
DiPascali, an interview at Madoff Securities, because she wanted to help Mr. DiPascalis mother
find him a decent job. Tr. 10,303. There is nothing in the record to suggest that Mrs. Bongiorno
understood she was recruiting Bernie Madoffs right hand man when she helped Mr. DiPascali

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 5 of 35

get a job at Madoff Securities instead, she was simply trying to help a neighbor with a problem.
Tr. 10,303. While the jury has found that Mrs. Bongiorno was a participant in the securities
fraud at Madoff Securities, and we must accept that finding for the purposes of this proceeding,
we respectfully submit that the trial record as a whole demonstrates that Mrs. Bongiorno was not
just a fraudster or self-interested sociopath. There are real elements of decency in her, and she
presents the Court a mix of personal traits that are not simply consistent with the personality of a
calculating criminal.
The many letters submitted with this memorandum attest to the fact that Mrs. Bongiorno
is not simply evil or venal or motivated entirely by greed. She has established many deep
personal friendships through her generosity and goodness. As Erica Epstein writes
The first word that comes to mind when I think of Annette is
generous. By generous, I am referring to her giving, loving and
supportive nature. She is generous with her spirit, with her heart,
and with her time. Annette always took interest in what I had to
say, and made a point of being a part of events that were
meaningful in my life. She never missed a dance recital, and I was
so happy to have her there watching me.
When I graduated from college, my parents made me a backyard
barbecue to celebrate, but Annette could not attend as she had a
family function for one of her nieces on the same day. Instead, she
took me to breakfast that morning just the two of us, and presented
me with a letter that she had written to me. In it, she recalled how
she felt seeing my mom pregnant with me, how much she loved
getting to watch me grow up, and telling me how proud my
grandmother would have been of me. It was the nicest letter I
have ever received, and it still remains in the top drawer of my
night table. I read it often, and never fail to be struck by the love it
conveys.
Letter of Erica Epstein, Exhibit C. Antoinette Trovato and her daughter Rosemary have written
the Court in similar terms. As Antoinette Trovato tells it,
I met Annette in December 1999.

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 6 of 35

During all these years Annette has not only been my confidante
and companion, she has been my brick wall, my support system.
She helped me during the times when my husband was in bad
health and when he passed two years ago. I too have had bad
periods of bad health including breast cancer, heart attack and
stroke and Annette has been by my side through it all. Annette
often calls me several times a day to make sure I am OK and to see
if I need anything. Annette continued to spend time with me and
help me out, even when she was busy dealing with her own
problems and had limited time in her schedule.
The say that if you are lucky, you will have a handful of close
friends during your lifetime. That is what Annette is to me and I
consider myself lucky and blessed to have her in my life. A
better friend I will never find.
Letter of Antoinette Trovato, attached as Exhibit D; and see Letter of Rosemary Trovato,
attached as Exhibit E (My siblings and I do what we can to keep [our mother Antoinette] busy,
but it is her close friendship with Annette that has gotten her through countless lonely hours. I
am so thankful for her friendship and loyalty and am quite honestly afraid for the time when she
will not be around the corner.).
The letters written to the Court by Mrs. Bongiornos friends contain many examples of
her basic kindness to others, some of whom were at that time considerably less fortunate than
she. For example, Dr. Ervin Fleishman describes Mrs. Bongiornos kindness to his daughter
Becky, who has Downs Syndrome, describing how
It may surprise you to hear this, but that is not the rule in
society. Annette would welcome her and ask her how she
was doing. She would offer her simple things to make her
comfortable and happy. My daughter Becky loved to visit
with Annette.
Letter of Dr. Ervin Fleishman, attached at Exhibit F. And see the letter of Katherine P.
Fleishman, R.N., attached as Exhibit G (Annette always pays close attention to what Becky is

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 7 of 35

saying and understands her. She is very kind to her and Becky always feels welcome in her
home.). Dr. Fleishman goes on to observe,
Over the years I know that Annette has helped her sister. Once
again, this was both emotionally, financially and in other ways.
What I am about to say, is very paradoxical considering the nature
of the crimes. Annette was not about money. She is a very simple
woman, she has limited education and limited understanding of
many topics. She simply believed in helping others.
Exhibit F. She is truly a genuine person according to her friends Linda and Joseph Mauro,
who have known her for more than 30 years; they describe how concerned Mrs. Bongiorno was
for their daughter, who is deaf, and her fundamental kindness. Letter of Linda and Joseph
Mauro, attached as Exhibit H. Other letters from Mrs. Bongiornos friends, describing her
commitment to those who have befriended her and others, are attached together as Exhibit I. As
Louis Morello observes in one of those letters, In times of trouble her friendship and support
could always be counted on by all those who love her. Letter of Louis Morello, attached in
Exhibit I. And those whom she befriended in the past are happy to step forward and be counted
on her behalf now that she is the one who needs their help.
We would remind the Court that the government called scores of witnesses over nearly
six months of trial. Yet, in all that time, the government did not call a single Madoff Securities
customer/victim to testify that Mrs. Bongiorno deceived him or her. Instead, Mrs. Bongiorno
called as character witnesses two former Madoff Securities customers Isaac Maya and Daniel
Jacobs -- who testified that they believed Mrs. Bongiorno was honest, and whose affection for
Mrs. Bongiorno was clear. Tr. 10,118; 10,113. Both Mr. Maya and Mr. Jacobs have written the
Court in support of Mrs. Bongiorno despite the losses they or their families have suffered as a
result of the Madoff Securities fraud. The letters of Mr. Maya and Mr. Jacobs are attached
together as Exhibit J. The Court may also recall that Mrs. Bongiorno was not able to call a third
6

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 8 of 35

Madoff Securities victim named Elizabeth Giglia as a character witness, because Mrs. Giglia
injured herself and was unable to attend Court. Mrs. Giglia and her husband have written the
Court to express their support for Mrs. Bongiorno, noting that she helped her Mother financially
when she was gravely ill, and help[ed] educate her sisters sons by helping with tuition. Letter
of Salvatore and Elizabeth Giglia, attached as Exhibit K. As Mrs. Giglia and her husband
observe, We also lost money with Madoff, but that does not change our feelings about Annette.
We still remain friends with her and her husband Rudy. We know Annette to be a very
generous person for 33 years. Id.
The letters written by Mrs. Bongiornos loving and extended family are similar. All of
them emphasize Mrs. Bongiornos fundamental decency, kindness and generosity. And they
also demonstrate, as Kerri Catapano writes, that Mrs. Bongiorno has essentially filled the role
of being our familys backbone since the passing of the older generation. I feel blessed to
have had someone with such a strong presence and positive influence in my family. I hope that
in this process, her true character was able to shine through for others to see in half the light that
I have been able to in over the past 28 years. Letter of Kerri Catapano, attached as Exhibit L.
According to Chris Argese, Mrs. Bongiorno was a patriarch of the family in that she
would always try bringing everyone together; it was what she lived for. My aunt is a strong
and proud lady, which is why people may view her as difficult sometimes but underneath it
all she really is a kind, compassionate person who wants nothing but the best for her family,
friends and those around her. Letter of Chris Argese, attached as Exhibit M. And Mrs.
Bongiornos sister, Marie DAllessandro, describes Mrs. Bongiorno as her rock, always
helping me emotionally and financially. Unable to conceive her own children my boys

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 9 of 35

became her boys & now my grandchildren have become her grandchildren. Letter of Marie
DAllesandro, attached as Exhibit N.
As her cousin, Colleen Weber recalls it, because Mrs. Bongiorno was the oldest of the
cousins, she served as a bridge to our generation, teaching us the sentiment of tradition. She
was the example of loyalty, respect and appreciation for the older generation. It was NEVER
about money with Annette it was her LOYALTY! She loves with all of her heart. Letter of
Colleen Weber, attached at Exhibit O. And Mrs. Bongiornos niece expresses the view of her
entire family when she writes
I do not look forward to the day that I have to explain all of this
to my children.
Annette has shown me and my children nothing but kindness,
generosity, consideration and love these last eleven years. I can
assure you that this family will have a huge void to fill without her
presence.
Letter of Susan DAllessandro, attached as Exhibit P. In fact, virtually every member of her
family who has written the Court describes how close-knit Mrs. Bongiornos family is, and the
role Mrs. Bongiorno plays in her family. As Mrs. Bongiornos second cousin Chrissy Weber
puts it,
From Sunday afternoon meals to birthday parties and holidays, my
family was always together. Now, with my generation starting the
next one, Annette is always making sure our families are together
and the traditions are getting passed down. Her home has been the
place where a lot of family memories have been made because she
has taken the time to keep us all together. Four generations later,
our bond is just as strong today as it was when Annette was a little
girl.
My mother was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis approximately
13 years ago. This is a very emotional topic for me and one that I
dont discuss with too many people. At one point, she was having
a very hard time physically and needed a certain treatment that
would put her out of work for a few days. I remember Annette
8

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 10 of 35

calling me and saying she would be there for us every step of the
way, no matter what was needed. Always true to her word, she
was the shoulder my Mom leaned on and the person who stood by
me and my siblings during that emotional time. Annettes love and
loyalty not only helped make a rough time easier, it also
showed me what it means to be there for someone you love and
care about.
Letter of Chrissy Weber, attached as Exhibit Q. And, as her niece Jessica Argese writes it
breaks my heart to think she wont be able to see my sister, brother and I these next few years.
Shes always been a part of our lives and it will never be the same without her. Letter of Jessica
Argese, attached as Exhibit R. Other letters written by Mrs. Bongiornos family and friends that
describe her position and role within her family and group of friends are attached together as
Exhibit S.
The nearly four years since her arrest have been difficult ones for Mrs. Bongiorno. She
has endured a very public form of humiliation and vilification in the press coverage of the
Madoff scandal. And yet, even the midst of her troubles, Mrs. Bongiornos principal concerns
have been looking after her friends and family. As her sister-in-law Susan Argese tells it
Weve watched her shed many tears these last five years, and not
over the loss of monetary things, but the loss of family, friends and
respect. People closest to her shunned her, people she so loved.
She went from being arrested, locked in her home for months, to
having her assets frozen and not being able to pay her bills. She
was stripped of dignity and the feeling of betrayal overwhelmed
her. People who never even knew her wrote despicable things on
blogs about her, especially about her looks and papers insinuated
there were drugs and sex rings (my sister-in-law would never!).
She doesnt even drink. I couldnt believe people could be so
vicious. The hundred Christmas cards she loved to get, went down
to three.

As I heard the guilty verdict on the news, I was petrified. But to

show you what kind of person Annette is, she sent me a text saying
Dont worry about me, Ill be okay. Ill be brave. I offered to
drive the two hours in to see her, and she replied she was worried

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 11 of 35

about me driving too late at night. She just got a guilty verdict and
was worried about me.
Letter of Susan Argese, attached as Exhibit T. And her treating psychologist, Kristin SchaeferSchiumo, Ph.D. reports a similar experience, when she writes
Many times, in our discussions of Ms. Bongiornos loneliness, she
would discuss her friendships over the years. Countless times I
heard of dinners at her home, outings with nieces and nephews.
Ms. Bongiorno seemed to give endlessly to family and friends and
to derive great meaning and purpose from doing so. There was an
innocence and kindness evidenced in these interactions. About
two weeks ago (following the guilty verdict), Ms. Bongiorno
reported being in a store to repair her eye glasses. Her back was to
a couple of people who began discussing the Madoff case. Ms.
Bongiorno reported that they felt that the five defendants were
selfish and did not care how much they hurt all of the victims
emotionally and financially. Importantly, Ms. Bongiorno was
visibly tearful and upset (far more so than when discussing her
verdict). She noted absolutely caring for the victims, worrying for
them, and feeling stuck and unable to help them. In fact, on the
day of the verdict itself, Ms. Bongiorno reached out to this
psychologist stating, I am ok. I am not afraid. I will remember
what you taught me. Though tearful about the incident at the
eye glass store, Ms. Bongiorno asked how I was feeling and told
me that I look better than I had in a bit. Despite an inordinate
amount of stress and fear around much unknown, Ms. Bongiorno
remains compassionate toward and focused on others.
Letter of Kristin Schaefer-Schiumo, Ph.D., attached as Exhibit U.
One of Mrs. Bongiornos former counsel, Diane Ferrone, has remarked on how
supportive Mrs. Bongiorno was of her during the stress of the trial in this matter:

I first met Annette in the falloff 2009, when she retained Sercarz &
Riopelle, LLP. In the early days of the firms representation of
Annette, I was her primary contact because the firms partners
were on trial on Long Island for eight months. During this time I
spoke with Annette regularly and got to know her very well. My
legal representation of her slowly evolved, and today, I am proud
to call her my friend.

10

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 12 of 35

Without any hesitation, I can represent to this Court that Annette is

a warm, caring and loyal woman. After Annette learned that I do
not have very much family, there wasnt a holiday that passed
when she didnt make sure that I wasnt going to be home alone.
Prior to Hurricane Sandy, she urged me to come to her house
because she felt I would be safer there than in Manhattan. (She
even offered for her husband to come and pick me up!)
While she was on trial and I was no longer her attorney, Annette
learned that I was going through a difficult time. Even though she
was the one facing federal criminal charges, she went out of her
way to regularly check on me to see that I was doing ok.
Letter of Diane Ferrone, attached as Exhibit V.
Despite the fear and dread that she has felt since the jurys verdict, Mrs. Bongiorno
continues to worry about others, and to focus on the needs of her friends and family. As Andrew
Maya writes,
Annette has been stripped of her wealth and is facing losing her
freedom entirely, yet her giving, loving, and generous spirit has
still not changed. Just last week my family and I had Italian
Sunday Dinner at Annettes. Annette cooked the favorite dishes
of my brother, sister and I (all different I might add). I could only
imagine that most people in Annettes situation would not be
concerned with who likes ziti versus spaghetti. Annette, however,
made both.
I cant imagine not having her to share my birthdays, holidays,
weekly dinners, good times, and bad times with. Annette is a one
of a kind person and she brings happiness to so many people. I am
sure I am not the only one [who] feels this way.
Letter of Andrew Maya, attached as Exhibit W. And Andrews mother, Rhonda Maya, notes
that
I have always considered myself very fortunate knowing that I
could turn to Annette whenever I needed someone to talk to. She
would always take time to listen and give me her honest opinion,
even if it wasnt what I wanted to hear. For that I am very
grateful.

11

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 13 of 35

She is a special, loving person who has a heart of gold. There will
certainly be a void in many lives knowing my dear friend Annette
will not be there to share it.
Letter of Rhonda Maya, attached as Exhibit X.
We respectfully submit that the foregoing descriptions of Mrs. Bongiorno and her
relationships with her family and friends are a far better measure of her character than the
allegations in the Indictment. While we must accept the Indictment as true for the purposes of
this proceeding, we submit that Mrs. Bongiorno is not beyond redemption. She loves and is
loved by many. She has contributed greatly to many, many lives, and can continue to do so if
given an opportunity. We acknowledge that she must pay a heavy price at the time she is
sentenced, despite her protestations of innocence, because that is what our society and our legal
system require. But we submit that the Court should impose a sentence on Mrs. Bongiorno that
she has a chance of completing, because she can contribute much to society if she is permitted to
re-enter it.
B. Mrs. Bongiornos Role in the Fraud at Madoff Securities
While the defense does not challenge the Sentencing Guidelines adjustment applicable to
Mrs. Bongiorno because of her role in the offense (see PSR, at 117), we do submit that the
characterization of her role is important for the purposes of assessing her culpability. The
defense respectfully submits that, even though the jurys verdict indicates that Mrs. Bongiorno
supervised others in connection with criminal activity that involved five or more participants and
was otherwise extensive, the proof at trial demonstrated that she had very limited discretion in
carrying out her duties at Madoff Securities. In a letter to the Probation Department dated July 1,
2014, the government asserts that Bongiorno was largely self-directed, often making up the

12

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 14 of 35

thousands of transactions in her clients accounts and instructing her staff to research possible
trades. A copy of the governments July 1, 2014 letter is attached as Exhibit Y.
In her response to the governments letter, Mrs. Bongiorno cited the trial record both
testimony and documentary exhibits which established that she had very limited discretion to
enter trades in her customers accounts. In fact, the trades she entered into her customers
accounts were all approved by Mr. Madoff, after being proposed by Mr. Madoff or Mrs.
Bongiornos customers, created by or proposed by Mr. Kugel, or created by Mr. DiPascali. A
copy of Mrs. Bongiornos July 1, 2014 letter responding to the governments July 1 letter is
attached as Exhibit Z. As the Court will recall, Mr. Madoff controlled everything at Madoff
Securities, right down to just how far the venetian blinds were open during the day. A control
freak like that most certainly directed the preparation of the false account statements at issue,
and the proof showed quite clearly that nothing was entered into any account statement by Mrs.
Bongiorno without Mr. Madoffs review and approval. Tr. 1032; 5752; 10,317. In fact, it is
laughable to think that Mr. Madoff would let Mrs. Bongiorno control any significant aspect of
his fraud, given her lack of sophistication, her tendency to make clerical errors and her
occasional forgetfulness, which could lead to the frauds detection. Tr. 1138.
Indeed, despite Mr. DiPascalis dubious claim to be a fringe player in the revisions to
the Avellino & Bienes statements in 1992-93, the trial record demonstrated that he was deeply
involved in directing Mrs. Bongiornos activities in connection with those revisions. And the
trades Mr. Kugel saw Mrs. Bongiorno entering into her customers accounts all came from the
box known as Davids Set-ups (GX 105-K-1), which contained a series of arbitrage trades
which Mr. Kugel created and taught Mrs. Bongiorno to divide and distribute to her clientele as
needed, when approved by Mr. Madoff. The back-dated trades in Mr. Kugels own accounts

13

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 15 of 35

were selected by him, not Mrs. Bongiorno. See Ex. AB-16a-c. We remind the Court that the
same was true for Mr. Kugels colleague, Marty Joel, who directed the back-dated trading in his
Madoff Securities account subject, of course, to Mr. Madoffs approval. See Ex. AB-22.
Thus, while it is certainly true that Mrs. Bongiorno was a supervisor at Madoff Securities,
and it is true that she had a team of persons working for her who entered fake trades into her
customers account statements, the fact of the matter is that Mrs. Bongiorno had very little
discretion to decide the manner in which her customers accounts were manipulated, and the
suggestion that she was a portfolio manager for her customers, with the implication that she
somehow engineered the fraud in some way, is not supported by the evidence. Instead, Mrs.
Bongiorno was a functionary, whose role was concededly important for the frauds success. As
such, she is less culpable in many respects than Mr. DiPascali and Mr. Kugel, who invented the
phony trades and directed their entry into the customers statements. Mrs. Bongiorno never
shared with Mr. DiPascali and Mr. Kugel the market savvy to create bogus options and arbitrage
trades, and she always took direction from Mr. Madoff with respect to which trades to enter into
her clients accounts and in what manner. Nor did Mrs. Bongiorno have Mr. Kugels, Mr.
Madoffs or Peter Madoffs expertise in market regulations at any time during the conspiracy.
We respectfully submit that these facts make her conduct less culpable than that of Mr.
DiPascali, Mr. Kugel and Mr. Peter Madoff, and we urge the Court to consider this when it
sentences Mrs. Bongiorno.
C. The Tax Evasion Counts
The jury has convicted Mrs. Bongiorno of tax evasion in connection with the withdrawals
she received for many years from the Bernard L. Madoff Special 1 and Special 2 accounts. We

14

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 16 of 35

must accept that verdict for the purposes of this proceeding. However, the following points
about Mrs. Bongiornos conduct in relation to the tax counts must be made on her behalf.
First, Mrs. Bongiorno did declare and pay taxes on millions of dollars in income and
securities transaction proceeds during the many years she has been convicted of evading the
payment of tax on the withdrawals she took from the Special 1 and Special 2 accounts. Mrs.
Bongiorno never failed to file a tax return during the years in question, and she paid hundreds of
thousands of dollars of tax on transactions, interest and dividends that we now know did not
exist. Mrs. Bongiornos payment of significant taxes during the years in which she has been
convicted of evading tax on a small part of her income sets her apart from other tax criminals
such as Mr. DiPascali or Mr. Kugel -- who evaded the payment of tax on all of their income or
on a significant majority of their income, and who never filed a tax return at all. Mrs. Bongiorno
was not a taxpayer who rejected the notion of paying tax altogether; or who sought to cheat the
government of the majority of the taxes she owed; or who brazenly failed to file a tax return
when earning significant income.
Nor did Mrs. Bongiorno engage her accountant in elaborate fraudulent schemes to evade
the payment of her income tax, in the manner described by David Friehling when he testified
about the elaborate tax frauds he committed with Bernard Madoff. Mrs. Bongiorno did not
advise her accountant of the withdrawals she took from the Special 1 and Special 2 accounts, but
she did not enlist Mr. Jacobs in a conspiracy to put bogus numbers on her tax return either.
Indeed, Mr. Jacobs described Mrs. Bongiorno as honest in his trial testimony, and he has
written a letter in support of Mrs. Bongiorno in connection with this proceeding. Tr. 10,118;
Exhibit J.

15

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 17 of 35

We do not argue that tax evasion is not a serious crime, and in this case, the jury has
found that Mrs. Bongiorno evaded the payment of income tax on a modest part of her income for
many years. But we do believe Mrs. Bongiornos conduct is not as serious as that of Mr.
Madoff, Mr. DiPascali, Mr. Kugel, or other significant tax evaders. Mrs. Bongiorno was not a
scofflaw who refused to pay any tax or who failed to file her returns. She did not evade the
payment of the bulk of the significant taxes she owed each year. She did dutifully declare and
pay taxes on most of the income she received, and she declared and paid tax on much of the
income she never received when the Madoff Securities firm went up in smoke. We ask the Court
to consider these facts when it considers the tax evasion counts in fashioning a sentence for Mrs.
Bongiorno.
D. The Conscious Avoidance Charge
The government requested that the Court charge the jury on the issue of Mrs.
Bongiornos conscious avoidance in this case. There is every reason to believe that Mrs.
Bongiorno was convicted by the jury on this theory of guilt, particularly given Mr. DiPascalis
testimony that he deceived Mrs. Bongiorno at the end of the Ponzi scheme, when he deliberately
concealed from her the fact that the Madoff Securities firm was about to collapse. Tr. 5472. If
Mr. DiPascali knew that Mrs. Bongiorno was a knowing participant in the fraud, his lie to her
wouldnt be necessary, and if Mrs. Bongiorno knew the nature of the fraud at Madoff Securities,
there wouldnt be any need to engage in the rigmarole of selling off the positions in the
accounts she closed at the time Madoff Securities collapsed. Tr. 4428, 4432. This evidence that
Mrs. Bongiorno did not understand the nature of the fraud at Madoff Securities, even at the end
of the scheme, suggests that she was less culpable than others who did know about aspects of the
fraud they never shared with her.

16

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 18 of 35

Mr. Kugels decision to lie to Mrs. Bongiorno after the collapse of Madoff Securities is
also consistent with this theory Mr. Kugel would have no reason to lie to Mrs. Bongiorno if she
were a full-fledged co-conspirator who knew all about the fraud. But Mr. Kugel apparently
didnt believe that Mrs. Bongiorno knew and understood the fraud, and so, he lied to her about
the way in which it operated. Tr. 2147-48. Mr. Kugels decision to lie to Mrs. Bongiorno
indicates that she was less knowledgeable and less culpable than he.
The fact that Mrs. Bongiorno never closed her accounts at Madoff Securities until
ordered to do so by Mr. Madoff and Mr. DiPascali is additional evidence of her willful
blindness to the frauds at Madoff Securities. If she truly knew of the frauds at Madoff
Securities, she would have closed her accounts and taken her money out of the firm long before
it collapsed. The fact that she left the bulk of her wealth at the firm, and expressed concern
about her tax exposure when directed to close her accounts, is evidence that she did not
understand the nature of the fraud at the firm, and was therefore convicted on a willful
blindness theory. But, as a wilfully blind person, she is less culpable than a knowing participant
in the frauds which the jury has found occurred at Madoff Securities.
We urge the Court to consider that Mrs. Bongiorno was most likely convicted on a
conscious avoidance theory at the time it imposes sentence. While the law judges an ostrich to
be as guilty as a fully knowing participant in a fraudulent scheme, an ostrich is clearly less
culpable for purposes of sentencing than a knowing participant. We respectfully submit that the
Court should sentence Mrs. Bongiorno as an individual who avoided knowing the facts about
Madoff Securities, based on the entire record in this case. And therefore, Mrs. Bongiorno should
receive a degree of leniency that a knowing participant in the fraud would not and should not
receive.

17

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 19 of 35

E. Mrs. Bongiornos Character

As the foregoing discussion indicates, Ms. Bongiorno was not a vicious or a venal person
when she participated in the frauds at Madoff Securities. She was not a sociopath motivated
only by selfishness. And she was not motivated by an overwhelming greed to commit the crimes
she stands convicted of, despite the governments emphasis at trial on her expenditures for
needless luxuries toward the end of her working life. As the letters submitted by her family
and friends attest, she was not just about money (Exhibit O) during the years she worked at
Madoff Securities, because she used much of the money she received to support her extended
family and assist her many friends.
We are confident the Court will recall that Mrs. Bongiorno wept openly when describing
the harm that was done to Mr. Mayas family at the time Madoff Securities collapsed. That says
something about her. And it says something about her that she was more concerned about the
well being of her sister-in-law and her treating psychologist than she was about herself on the
day the jury found her guilty of every count pleaded against her in the Indictment. See Exhibits
T and U. She has always been and remains compassionate toward and focused on others.
Exhibit U.
Ms. Bongiorno has suffered greatly for her mistakes already. She has been impoverished
financially, and will lose everything she has as a result of her conviction. She has been
devastated emotionally because she stands convicted of harming many of her closest friends and
family members, whom she encouraged to invest at Madoff Securities. For the last six years, she
has been pilloried in the press over and over again, publicly embarrassed by her expenditures,
and humiliated by the cruel descriptions of her.

18

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 20 of 35

Despite the difficulties she has faced since the collapse of Madoff Securities, Mrs.
Bongiorno remains respectful of the law. We remind the Court that this defendant surrendered to
the U.S. Marshals Service shortly before Christmas 2010 when directed to do so, because she
could not raise a bail that was adequate to satisfy the governments demands. Since her release
on bail almost four years ago, Mrs. Bongiorno has been compliant with every term of her bail.
And she maintained her composure throughout the lengthy and stressful trial of this matter,
perhaps doing a better job of that than her counsel did at certain moments during the trial. In
fact, several of the letters written by her family note how grateful she and her family are that the
Court unlike so many others has treated her with respect and dignity during these
proceedings. See Exhibits S (Letter of Peter Argese), and T.
Since her conviction, Mrs. Bongiorno has suffered the fear of uncertainty at what her
future will be. She knows that she faces a difficult and diminished future that will include a term
of incarceration, and she is terrified at the prospect that she will spend the rest of her days in
custody, separated from her family and her friends. Still, she focuses her concerns on others.
Again and again she has expressed to counsel her concern that her husband be provided for,
saying I know I will have a roof over my head and something to eat, but what about Rudy?
And her treating psychologist reports that Mrs. Bongiorno seemed more worried about the
psychologists well being than her own during their last appointment together. See Exhibit U.
That is the real measure of Mrs. Bongiorno, who remains a very generous, caring, loving, loyal
and generous person, even now. See Exhibit X.
F. Mrs. Bongiornos Offer to Forfeit Her Wealth
At the time the jury returned its verdict, the Court directed the parties to discuss forfeiture
issues in the hope of resolving a preliminary judgment of forfeiture prior to the imposition of

19

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 21 of 35

sentence. By June 23, 2014, counsel had not heard from the government any proposal to resolve
the forfeiture issues. On or about that day, after consultation with Mrs. Bongiorno and her
husband, I discussed a proposed forfeiture of properties with the government, in the hopes of
settling the governments criminal and civil forfeiture allegations against Mrs. Bongiorno, as
well as the governments civil forfeiture complaint against assets owned by Mr. Bongiorno in his
own name. After an oral discussion, I formalized Mrs. Bongiornos and Mr. Bongiornos offer
in the letter attached as Exhibit AA to this Memorandum. As is indicated in Exhibit AA, Mrs.
Bongiorno and her husband have offered to forfeit assets worth $14.6 million (an amount equal
to their total withdrawals from their Madoff Securities firm accounts, without credit for
deposits), consisting of every asset Mrs. Bongiorno owns individually; every asset Mrs.
Bongiorno and her husband own jointly; and a sum of approximately $4 to $5 million from an
account owned by Mr. Bongiorno individually, into which only $3 million in Madoff Securities
funds were deposited in 2006 and 2008, and into which other, untainted funds were deposited by
Mr. Bongiorno for many years before the Madoff Securities firm collapsed. See Exhibit AA.
Thus, Mrs. Bongiorno has offered to forfeit all property she owns individually or jointly
with her husband immediately, and she and her husband have offered to pay in by forfeiture
every dollar they ever received from a Madoff Securities account, without receiving any credit
for the $920,000 they deposited into the Madoff Securities firm many years ago.
Mrs. Bongiorno recognizes that she can never make it right for the Madoff Securities
victims, many of whom lost their life savings or substantial savings when the Madoff Securities
firm collapsed. According to the press reports, many of those victims will receive approximately
75 cents or more on the dollar when the Bankruptcy Court is done distributing the funds
collected through the Madoff Securities Bankruptcy, and after the forfeited funds are disbursed.

20

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 22 of 35

A copy of an article from the Financial Times on this topic is attached as Exhibit BB. If her
proposal was accepted, Mrs. Bongiorno would be left nothing in her own name, a harsh result
which she recognizes is appropriate in this case.
We respectfully submit that Mrs. Bongiornos willingness to forfeit any property she has
an interest in (provided that the forfeiture case against her husband is also settled) should be
considered by the Court when it decides her sentence. Mrs. Bongiornos willingness to surrender
everything she owns and everything she and her husband own jointly without any litigation
signals a genuine concern for the Madoff Securities victims, and speaks to her fundamental
decency as a person.
G. Mrs. Bongiornos Health, and Life Expectancy
Mrs. Bongiorno is now almost 66 years old. PSR 129. She is overweight, and suffers
from hypertension, diabetes, kidney stones, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD),
high cholesterol and other medical conditions. While none of these conditions is immediately
life-threatening, they are significant for the defendant in combination, and they will become even
more significant as she continues to age and her medical condition continues to decline.
The average life expectancy for a female born in the United States in 2012 is 81 years of
age. See Exhibit CC. It is very unlikely Mrs. Bongiorno will reach the age of 81, given her
familys history. Her mother died at 69 years old. PSR, 129. Her father died at 75. Her
maternal grandmother died at 74, and her maternal grandfather died at 73. Her paternal
grandmother died at 85, but her paternal grandfather was only 62 when he passed away. Given
this history, it appears to be unlikely that Mrs. Bongiorno will live past her mid-70s, and the
likelihood that she will live to reach the average age for an American female born in 2012 (81) is
very small.

21

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 23 of 35

Incarceration has been demonstrated to reduce the average life span of those who are
incarcerated. The study of inmates incarcerated in New York State which is attached as Exhibit
DD found that, on average, inmates incarcerated in the New York State prison system lost two
years of life span for every year of incarceration. See Exhibit DD. While incarceration in the
Federal Bureau of Prisons system is not the same as incarceration in a New York State
Penitentiary, there is no reason to believe that incarceration in the Federal Bureau of Prisons
system will enhance an inmates lifespan. In fact, the Courts have often recognized that
incarceration in the Federal Bureau of Prisons system tends to reduce an inmates life expectancy
where the inmate is older or infirm. See United States v. Gigante, 989 F. Supp. 436, 443
(E.D.N.Y. 1998) (recognizing that elderly and infirm defendants life would be threatened and
shortened by incarceration); United States v. Blarek, 7 F. Supp.2d 192, 212 (E.D.N.Y. 1998)
(Despite federal authorities' concern for prisoners' welfare, incarceration is likely to be
detrimental to this defendant's health, resulting in a lessening of his present life expectancy).
And there certainly is no reason to think that incarceration will lengthen Mrs.
Bongiornos life. As is indicated by the letters attached to this memorandum, Mrs. Bongiorno is
devoted to her close circle of family and friends. That circle of family and friends is what
motivates her, supports her, and keeps her functioning at this difficult point in her life. She will
lose her connection to that circle of family and friends to a significant degree when she enters the
prison system. Her ability to communicate with and be with her family and friends will be
severely diminished. While it is impossible to predict exactly what outcome this will result in
for Mrs. Bongiornos health, we respectfully submit that incarceration is certain to reduce Mrs.
Bongiornos lifespan, given who she is and her physical and psychological condition at this time.

22

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 24 of 35

The Probation Department has recommended that Mrs. Bongiorno serve a sentence of 20
years, followed by a one year term of supervised release. Several observations should be made
about this recommendation. First, by recommending a term of imprisonment of 20 years, the
Probation Department has recognized that the Sentencing Guidelines recommended sentence of
lifetime incarceration makes no sense in this case, and that a sentence of a term of years that
Mrs. Bongiorno can complete is appropriate. In other words, the Probation Department
recognizes that Mrs. Bongiorno is not unredeemable, that she is not a person whom society
should shun forever, that she is not a continuing threat to society, and that she should be
permitted to re-enter society at some point.
Second, the Probation Department has recommended a term of supervised release of only
one year. This signals the Probation Departments view with which we agree -- that Mrs.
Bongiorno is not likely to re-offend, and that her conduct at Madoff Securities was not indicative
of such an immoral character that would require vigilant monitoring after her sentence is served.
The Probation Department has recognized that if Mrs. Bongiorno is permitted to re-enter society,
the need to supervise her is slight, because the likelihood that she will re-offend is miniscule.
Finally, we note that if the Court were to sentence Mrs. Bongiorno to a term of 20 years
of incarceration, she would be required to serve 16 years of incarceration before release to a
halfway house, assuming that Mrs. Bongiorno is credited with 15% good time while
incarcerated and that she is released to a halfway house with 6 months remaining on her
sentence, as is typical when a lengthy sentence is imposed. Thus, if Mrs. Bongiorno were
sentenced to a term of 20 years of incarceration, she would be released to a halfway house
shortly after reaching the average life expectancy for an American female born in 2012.

23

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 25 of 35

Given the fact that it is extremely unlikely Mrs. Bongiorno will live to be 81 years old,
we respectfully submit that a sentence of between 8 and 10 years is more appropriate, and is
actually consistent with the Probation Departments view of Mrs. Bongiorno. The Probation
Department does not believe Mrs. Bongiorno is incapable of redemption, and does not
recommend that she be denied any hope of re-entering society. The Probation Department did
not recommend life as a sentence, and we are confident that it did not intend to recommend
that Mrs. Bongiorno be incarcerated for a term that is certainly the equivalent of life.
Because Mrs. Bongiorno will likely die in her mid-seventies given her medical and
familial history and the strains that incarceration will certainly put on her health, we submit that
a more appropriate sentence to impose on Mrs. Bongiorno is a sentence of incarceration between
8 and 10 years in length. Service of such a sentence may well require Mrs. Bongiorno to remain
in custody for the rest of her days. It is entirely possible that Mrs. Bongiorno will die inside if
required to serve a sentence of 8 to 10 years. But it is also possible that Mrs. Bongiorno will
complete such a sentence and be able to return to society, her family and friends near the very
end of her life. For this reason, we respectfully submit that a sentence of between 8 and 10 years
of incarceration is entirely consistent with the intentions expressed by the Probation Department
to give Mrs. Bongiorno a chance to live her last days outside a jail cell. And we ask the Court
to impose such a sentence based on all it knows about Mrs. Bongiorno from the trial of this
matter, the PSR and this sentencing submission.

24

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 26 of 35

ARGUMENT
POINT I
THE COURT SHOULD NOT IMPOSE
A SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT FOR LIFE
BECAUSE THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES
APPLICABLE TO MRS. BONGIORNO
RESULT IN AN UTTER TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE
The Courts have frequently noted that the Sentencing Guidelines for white-collar crimes
[can produce] a black stain on common sense. United States v. Parris, 573 F. Supp. 2d 744, 754
(E.D.N.Y. 2008). At least one judge in the Southern District has frequently lamented the utter
travesty of justice that sometimes results from the guidelines fetish with absolute arithmetic, as
well as the harm that guideline calculations can visit on human beings if not cabined by common
sense. United States v. Adelson, 441 F. Supp. 2d 506, 512 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (Rakoff, J.)
(declining to impose the life sentence recommended by the sentencing guidelines and imposing a
42 month sentence instead). Indeed, it is frequently the case that the Courts depart substantially
from the applicable sentencing guidelines in fraud cases like this one, and impose sentences
substantially below the sentencing range dictated by a strict guidelines analysis. See, e.g.,
United States v. Ronald Ferguson, 584 F. Supp.2d 447 (D. Conn. 2008) (imposing sentences of
48 months and 24 months despite a sentencing guidelines range of life imprisonment); United
States v. Ovid, 2010 WL 3940724 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 1, 2010) (imposing a sentence of 60 months
when the sentencing guidelines recommended range was 210-262 months, and decrying the
rigidity of the guidelines); United States v. Hatfield, 06 Cr. 550 (JES) (E.D.N.Y. May 9, 2014)
(imposing a sentence of 84 months imprisonment when the sentencing guidelines recommended
a life sentence in a massive accounting fraud); see also Spears v. United States, 129 S. Ct. 840,
843 (2009) (recognizing a district courts authority to vary from the Guidelines based on policy

25

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 27 of 35

disagreement with them, and not simply based on an individualized determination that they yield
an excessive sentence in a particular case)
In this case, the Court is confronted with a situation in which the massive loss caused by
the Madoff Securities Ponzi scheme, Mrs. Bongiornos position as a supervisor of others at the
firm, the large number of victims and the fact that Madoff Securities was a broker/dealer and an
investment advisor all result in sentencing enhancements and a recommended sentence of life
imprisonment that simply makes no sense.
The Probation Department itself recognizes that imposing a sentence in accordance with
the required guidelines calculation will do no good for anyone. Society will incur a significant
cost to incarcerate Mrs. Bongiorno for the rest of her days, and society will gain little from such
a sentence in return. Mrs. Bongiornos victims wont be made whole by such a sentence they
will never be fully compensated for their losses and Mrs. Bongiorno doesnt have the money to
make them whole or even near whole. Nor would Mrs. Bongiornos victims or society in
general be made any safer by imposing a life sentence on Mrs. Bongiorno, since there is no
realistic likelihood that she will ever re-offend or even have the ability to commit another crime.
In these circumstances, the sentence called for by the Sentencing Guidelines is ludicrous, and
would result in an utter travesty of justice of the sort decried in Adelson and other cases.
Therefore, we urge the Court to reject the sentence recommended by the Sentencing
Guidelines applicable to Mrs. Bongiorno, and impose a sentence on her that will require her to
serve at least the majority of the rest of her life in prison, but that will give her the chance to reenter society near the end of her life.

26

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 28 of 35

POINT II
THE FACTORS DESCRIBED IN
TITLE 18 U.S.C. SECTION 3553(a)(2)
WEIGH IN FAVOR OF
A NON-GUIDELINES SENTENCE
OF BETWEEN 8 TO 10 YEARS
Title 18 U.S.C. 3553 provides that the Court should impose a sentence
sufficient but not greater than necessary to provide just punishment for the defendant, and
requires the Court to consider the nature and circumstances of the offense and history and
characteristics of the defendant. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3553, the Court must also consider
the need for the sentence it imposes to reflect the seriousness of the offense, [and] to promote
respect for the law. 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(1) and (2)(A). These sections of the Code direct the
Court to consider the defendant and his actions holistically, and to provide just punishment for
the offense in light of all the facts known to the Court.
Ms. Bongiorno respectfully submits that a review of the factors the Court must consider
pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(1) and (2) weighs in favor of a sentence that gives her
some chance of re-entering society. In this case, we respectfully submit that Mrs. Bongiornos
sentence should be somewhere between 8 and 10 years, for the following reasons.
When the Court considers the history and characteristics of the defendant, as it is
required to do by Title 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(1), we urge to Court to consider Mrs. Bongiornos
importance to her extended family. Virtually every person who has written to the Court has
emphasized Mrs. Bongiornos importance to her extended family, remarking on her generosity to
her family (e.g., Exhibit J, Letter of Isaac Maya), or on her strong presence and positive
influence on them (Exhibit L, Letter of Kerri Catapano).

27

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 29 of 35

In the days when the sentencing guidelines were binding on the Court, factors such as
Mrs. Bongiornos importance to her family members would justify a departure from the
applicable sentencing guidelines sentencing range. See, e.g., United States v. Londono, 76 F.3d
33, 36 (2d Cir. 1996) (this Court and other courts of appeals have recognized that a defendants
familial responsibilities may present such extraordinary circumstances that a downward
departure in sentencing is necessary and permissible); United States v. Johnson, 964 F.2d 124,
129 (2d Cir. 1992) (same). Now that the sentencing guidelines are only advisory, the reasoning
of these cases supports a non-guidelines sentence below the applicable sentencing range, and
Mrs. Bongiorno submits that she should receive a non-guidelines sentence based in part on her
extended familys circumstances. See United States v. Galante, 111 F.3d 1029, 1035 (2d Cir.
1997) (upholding sentencing courts decision to depart downward based upon the Judges
determination that removal of the father from this unit at this particular point in time would
have a disastrous effect on the children in terms of possibilities of their education and
upbringing); United States v. Alba, 933 F.2d 1117, 1122 (2d Cir. 1991) (upholding downward
departure where defendants incarceration in accordance with the Guidelines might well result
in the destruction of an otherwise strong family unit).
Sentencing Ms. Bongiorno to spend the rest of her life in prison will not satisfy anyones
legitimate desire for retribution, because everyone who is familiar with this case knows that Ms.
Bongiorno was not the principal wrongdoer in this case, and the proof at trial established that
there were significant parts of the fraud at Madoff Securities that she knew nothing about and
played no role in. Indeed, as we have argued above, the governments request for a conscious
avoidance instruction as to Mrs. Bongiorno provided the jury with a theory of guilt that is
something less than knowing and deliberate wrongdoing, and there is every reason to believe the

28

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 30 of 35

jury decided this case on that basis. And, if that is basis on which the jury convicted Mrs.
Bongiorno, she is less culpable than a knowing and deliberate perpetrator of fraud would be.
Nor is a life sentence needed to deter Ms. Bongiorno from future crimes. Given her age
and notoriety, she will never have the ability or inclination to re-offend. And imposing a life
sentence on Ms. Bongiorno will certainly not improve the Madoff Securities victims chances at
restitution, because Ms. Bongiorno was herself ultimately impoverished by the Madoff Securities
fraud. To sentence Ms. Bongiorno to a life in prison at this point, at the end of her life, will
accomplish nothing other than to inflict unnecessary pain on her and her family, and it will do
nothing to assuage the publics loss or mitigate its outrage. For all these reasons, which are
stated more fully below, we submit that a sentence that does not include a term of lifetime
incarceration is appropriate in this case, and we submit that a sentence of between 8 and 10 years
is more than adequate to satisfy the applicable Section 3553(a)(2) factors. Such a sentence is
clearly sufficient but not greater than necessary to meet the goals of the sentencing process.
See 18 U.S.C. 3553(a).
A. The Applicable Section 3553(a)(2) Factors
Title 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(2)(A) requires the Court to consider the need for the sentence it
imposes to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide
just punishment for the offense. We acknowledge that Mrs. Bongiorno stands convicted of
serious crimes, and that a sentence of incarceration must be imposed to promote respect for the
law and provide just punishment. C.f. Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 595-96 (2007) (a
probationary sentence imposes a significant restraint on the liberty of a defendant, and can
satisfy the requirements of Title 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)).

29

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 31 of 35

At this point, Ms. Bongiornos life has already been changed entirely as a result of this
case. She has lost everything she ever gained from her offense, and she has been vilified
publicly for her crimes for the past six years. A sentence of 8 to 10 years which very may well
be a life sentence is adequate to complete her punishment. There is no need to impose a
symbolic sentence of life imprisonment, or a sentence that amounts to multiples of Mrs.
Bongiornos future life expectancy in order to make a point or punish her further.
The second factor listed in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(2) is to afford adequate deterrence from
criminal conduct. 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(2)(B). This factor focuses on general deterrence of the
public from committing criminal conduct of the type the defendant has engaged in.
With respect to general deterrence, Mrs. Bongiorno submits that a sentence of 8 to 10
years for a defendant who is almost 66 years old and in poor health will provide adequate general
deterrence to the future criminal conduct of others similarly situated to her. A lengthy sentence
of the kind proposed here, together with the public vilification and Mrs. Bongiornos
impoverishment by the fraud itself, is enough to deter anyone else from engaging in the conduct
for which Mrs. Bongiorno was convicted. What member of the public, contemplating
participating in a massive fraud, would engage in that conduct if he or she knew the end result
would be years of public humiliation, the loss of every piece of property owned, and a jail
sentence that might keep him or her imprisoned for the rest of his or her life? No one would do
such a thing. Imposition of a lengthy sentence on Mr. Bongiorno at this point nearly six years
after Madoff Securities collapse, and after the jury has returned a very public verdict against her
-- wont add any further momentum to the general deterrence that this case and others like it
impress on the public. For this reason too, a sentence that includes a term of incarceration
between 8 and 10 years is adequate.

30

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 32 of 35

The third factor listed in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(2)(C) focuses on specific deterrence of

further criminal conduct by the defendant herself. It requires to the Court to consider the need
to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant. 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(2)(C). There
is no need to impose a term of imprisonment of more than 8 to 10 years on Ms. Bongiorno to
deter her from future crimes at this juncture. If she is lucky enough to live out the sentence that
the Court will impose on her, Mrs. Bongiorno will be well past the age of retirement when she is
released from prison, and the notoriety of her case will effectively prevent her from ever again
engaging in any sort of fraud. So there is no chance she will commit crimes in the future that
are similar to those at issue here. And with six years of good conduct since leaving her
employment at Madoff Securities, there is every reason to think that Mrs. Bongiorno will live out
the rest of her life without further illegality if she is able to complete the sentence the Court
imposes on her. There is simply no reason to believe that Ms. Bongiorno will re-offend at this
point. Thus, here, too, there is no need to impose a prison sentence of life incarceration or 20
years on Ms. Bongiorno to satisfy the requirements of Title 18 United States Code, Section
3553(a)(2)(C).
18 U.S.C 3553(a)(2)(D) speaks of the need for a sentence to provide the defendant
with needed educational or vocational training, medical care or other correctional treatment in
the most effective manner. The defendant respectfully submits that incarceration for the rest of
her life is not necessary to ensure her medical treatment or rehabilitation. Educational and
vocational training are not needed at this point to ensure her successful re-entry into society, and
she will receive medical care whether incarcerated or not. Incarcerating Ms. Bongiorno for the
rest of her life at this point wont do a thing to assist her to reform herself, and it will only
damage her family and ensure that their lives are made more difficult and miserable. Thus, an

31

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 33 of 35

analysis of this factor also suggests that a sentence of incarceration for life or even 20 years is
unnecessary.
18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(6) speaks to the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities
among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct. The
defendant respectfully submits that this factor also weighs in favor of a sentence of 8 to 10 years
of incarceration. As we have noted above, the Courts have often sentenced offenders like Mrs.
Bongiorno to relatively modest terms of imprisonment, even when their sentencing guidelines
calculations appear to require lifetime incarceration. There is no reason to create a disparity
between Mrs. Bongiornos sentence and the sentences imposed in those cases. Therefore, this
section of Title 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) also suggests that a sentence that does not include a life term
of incarceration is appropriate here.
Finally, 18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(7) requires the Court to consider the need to provide
restitution to any victims of the offense. We respectfully submit that Mrs. Bongiorno cant do
more to accomplish this goal than forfeit every penny she owns, which will surely happen as a
result of the criminal forfeiture in this case. Ms. Bongiorno has nothing else to give the Madoff
Securities victims. Jailing Mrs. Bongiorno for the rest of her life at this point will not make it
any more likely that Ms. Bongiornos victims might be made whole, and therefore, this factor
also weighs in favor of a sentence of something much less than life imprisonment.
In the circumstances of this case, the sentencing range calculated by the Sentencing
Guidelines simply makes no sense and imposing a sentence in accordance with that calculation,
or even in accordance with the Probation Departments recommendation, will do no good for
anyone. Society will not be made safer by a sentence of lifetime incarceration in this case, and it
would incur a significant cost to incarcerate Mrs. Bongiorno for the rest of her days. Mrs.

32

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 34 of 35

Bongiornos victims wont be made whole by such a sentence they will compensated for their
losses in the bankruptcy action and forfeiture actions, which wont be affected in the slightest
way by the sentence imposed here. In these circumstances, the sentencing range calculated by
the Sentencing Guidelines is ludicrous, and the sentencing recommendation of the Probation
Department is unnecessarily harsh. A twenty year sentence for Ms. Bongiorno would be an
utter travesty of justice of the sort decried in Adelson and other cases every bit as much as a
sentence of life imprisonment would. Instead, a sentence that includes a harsh term of 8 to10
years of imprisonment is appropriate in the unique circumstances of this case. United States v.
Adelson, 441 F. Supp. 2d at 512.
As is indicated by the foregoing analysis, the various relevant factors set forth in Title 18
United States Code Section 3553(a) all weigh in favor of a sentence that does not guarantee that
Mrs. Bongiorno be incarcerated for the rest of her natural life, and Mrs. Bongiorno respectfully
requests that the Court impose such a sentence on her, in the range of 8 to 10 years.
B.

Restitution and Fine Issues

The defendant also requests that the Court decline to impose restitution or a fine on her. Mrs.
Bongiorno will lose everything she owns in forfeiture in this case, and therefore any fine or
restitution order would be an empty gesture. In fact, the Probation Department does not
recommend that restitution or a fine be imposed, noting that Mrs. Bongiorno has no financial
ability to pay a fine, and the Probation Department notes that any restitution can be paid through
the remission process in connection with the property Mrs. Bongiorno will be required to forfeit.

33

Case 1:10-cr-00228-LTS Document 1054 Filed 07/09/14 Page 35 of 35

CONCLUSION
For all the foregoing reasons, Annette Bongiorno respectfully requests that the Court
impose a sentence on her that is just, and she contends that such a sentence would include a term
of incarceration of between 8 and 10 years.
Dated: New York, New York
July 9, 2014
SERCARZ & RIOPELLE, LLP

By:

/S/
Roland G. Riopelle, Esq. (RR-2950)
Maurice H. Sercarz, Esq. (MS-7020)
810 Seventh Avenue, Suite 620
New York, NY 10019
(212) 586-4900
Fax (212) 586-1234
Attorneys for Defendant Annette Bongiorno

34