Janice, ... "Do you think Mangiapane was considered by the authorities to be less culpable? ... Why would Mangiapane be treated differently?"
Because the federal prosecutors have broad discretion to do that and thereby allocate their considerable resources as they alone see fit. It could be because a necessary witness has gone missing (or has a "faulty" memory) and cannot/will not testify to support the allegations in the indictment. It could also be that the feds consider information Joe M. was willing to give them was valuable (my guess). Less culpable sometimes has nothing to do with any agreement made or action taken.
Or, the prosecutors may have had a weak case against Joe M. I tend to think they had/have a pretty solid case.
The reasons are in the sealed documents. And, Mangiapane could still agree to be liable for civil forfeitures and tax deficiencies (not saying that's what happened).
But, the feds know what they did (and why, but we don't). They are very tenacious and do not easily give away indictments. Believe me, the feds seriously consider their options before doing anything like this.
BTW, not all have pled guilty. How about Dynkowski? Where is he? Does he swim with the fishes or is he in Poland? Also, it seems entirely possible that not all involved have been indicted yet. Woods' $140+k came from Mangiapane to Woods via Brown (according to the indictment) and Woods was to drive the $140+k to Dynkowski (according to Woods).
Do you think that's true? If so, do you think Dynkowski was supposed to keep it all?
It will eventually all come out if/when the documents are unsealed. There is no obligation of the prosecutors to say why exactly - until they do. ... eom
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
