Sideri's attorney wants to sue victim

The attorney for Eric Sideri, who is accused of a Soprano's-style beating of one of his restaurant managers, says he wants to file criminal charges and a civil lawsuit against the victim for stealing $20,000, but claims his hands are tied.

[Concerned]

Wrong they are innocent

[Niceguy]

Yes they are.

[Pulling up a chair]

LMAO! Sure.

[Greatwhite]

Are Atnny Krasnoos hands tied like the victims were tied with zip strips?

[Big Mike]

Next they will be suing the town.None of this would have happened if they denied the license in the first place.The Town set him up!HaHaHa.

[Pulling up a chair]

Good catch, GW. Yes, his hands are tied. With tie wraps.

[Greatwhite]

I do not no how these dirtball lawyers sleep at night either.

[Pulling up a chair]

Easy -- on a mattress stuffed with cash.

[Greatwhite]

ought to be ashamed of himself

[Pulling up a chair]

It's an interesting legal tactic, really. Note that comment about the victim running to the police -- as if that was the victim's maneuver to head off a possible law suit.

Who would think of that? Seriously, who.

And to think that some of the blogging detractors against the victim early on complained that he must be lying because he didn't go to the police until the next day. This has the attorney saying the guy rushed off to the police, to keep Eric from suing him.

Here I was, all along, thinking he was afraid Eric would kill him, not slap him with a civil suit.

However, Eric didn't go to the police at all -- so where does that leave him? Was he trying to handle this as a "gentleman" and keep it away from the police?

(Hard to type that w/a straight face.)

[Greatwhite]

Yes every time I am missing twenty grand out of my house I do not bother calling the police they are to busy , I just beat the crap out of my nieghbors till one of them admits guilt.That is the best way to get results who needs the police if it is all clean cash. If it was clean cash Eric should have called the police PERIOD!! but it was not!! THAT IS WHY HE HANDLED IT THE WAY HE DID AND HE SCREWED IT UP PERIOD!!now he has to face the music.

The lawyer suing the little Brazilian dude is a last chance act of desperation is what it is and it will not fly rather foolish something like a three stoges episode in my opinion.

[Pulling up a chair]

If he's running a business he should have insurance against employee misdeeds in which case he could have recouped on an insurance claim. But that assumes the money was clean/legit and well that blows that angle.

[Greatwhite]

Wait and see PUAC, more will come out of this story and do not be surprised if the little Brazilian guy turns out to be not only a manager but a "runner" as well.
I hope the 20k is in Brazil feeding hungry mouths.
Rather than here feeding hungry habits//adictions.

[ringo]

someone in tyngsboro had to have gotten paid off for this dirt ball and his wife to get a licence to sell booze

[Sal]

Yes there definitely must have been some type of payoff otherwise they would be closed down by now or at least not be serving liquor. This should be looked into I wouldn't be surprised if some dirty money exchanged hands to broker this deal. The only reason they still have the license is the selectmen or whoever granted this license to wannabe Tony and Carmella doesn't want the dime dropped on them I would imagine. Paulie Walnuts aka Alf Gonorrhea was probably also involved in this fiasco with the town.

[Greatwhite]

Everyone on these blogs make a call to the town ask why

[Amused]

I think the lawyers hands are really tied because if he filed such a suit, his client might be deemed to have waived his 5th Amendment privilege. Or, if he took the 5th, the lawsuit would be dismissed. In any event, if he files the suit, the defendant would in all likelihood file a counterclaim for assault and battery and a host of other things, that sure looks like a winner at this point.

What's more, if the suit claims the money was Sideri's that would be the last nail in the coffin for the liquor license. The license is in the wife's name because he can't be on the license or have an undisclosed ownership interest in the license. If the money was stolen and was "his" money, then he is admitting to having such an undisclosed ownership interest. If he has no ownership interest in the business, he has no ownership interest in the money. You can't sue someone for stealing money unless you have standing as an aggrieved person, which means you are an owner of the money stolen.

O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.

[Greatwhite]

Sal wrote:

Yes there definitely must have been some type of payoff otherwise they would be closed down by now or at least not be serving liquor. This should be looked into I wouldn't be surprised if some dirty money exchanged hands to broker this deal. The only reason they still have the license is the selectmen or whoever granted this license to wannabe Tony and Carmella doesn't want the dime dropped on them I would imagine. Paulie Walnuts aka Alf Gonorrhea was probably also involved in this fiasco with the town.

Are still serving booze? should not even be open!! Why are the townie's allowing this to go on that is wrong.
That is a big slap in the face to every one who lives in Tyngsboro you pay these guys.

[Greatwhite]

Amused wrote:

I think the lawyers hands are really tied because if he filed such a suit, his client might be deemed to have waived his 5th Amendment privilege. Or, if he took the 5th, the lawsuit would be dismissed. In any event, if he files the suit, the defendant would in all likelihood file a counterclaim for assault and battery and a host of other things, that sure looks like a winner at this point.
What's more, if the suit claims the money was Sideri's that would be the last nail in the coffin for the liquor license. The license is in the wife's name because he can't be on the license or have an undisclosed ownership interest in the license. If the money was stolen and was "his" money, then he is admitting to having such an undisclosed ownership interest. If he has no ownership interest in the business, he has no ownership interest in the money. You can't sue someone for stealing money unless you have standing as an aggrieved person, which means you are an owner of the money stolen.
O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.

You are correct , corect me if I am wrong as you seem to no your stuff ,shouldnt this pizza shop be closed down after crimes like these went on ? Also the liquor false liscene issue alone

[Greatwhite]

Correct Sal lots of old and new enemies ,debts,pay-backs,unfinished deals,busines to adress, with this guy.
word travels fast he will have the red carpet in the big house for sure and it is not loaded with little Brazilian dudes.
revenge is a dish best served cold.