ComplianceMitigation's podcast

Big government brings more government investigations. Our team at Compliance Mitigation helps business leaders with effective compliance training. Learn how to lower risk levels with compliance training. Avoid charges for white-collar crime.

Why Most Character Letters Are Useless—And How Mine Helped Me Get 28 Months Instead of 60 02/24/2025

Why Most Character Letters Are Useless—And How Mine Helped Me Get 28 Months Instead of 60 Before sentencing, people kept telling me, “Get as many character letters as possible.” So, I almost made the mistake that most defendants make—sending the judge a stack of generic letters that meant nothing. made one thing clear in his interview: "I value a letter from a janitor who knows you over a senator who doesn’t." That was a wake-up call. It’s not about how many letters you get. It’s about who writes them and what they say. Most Character Letters Are a Waste of Paper Judges have seen it all. They know when a letter is real and when it’s just someone doing a favor. I wanted my judge to read letters that actually meant something—letters that showed who I was beyond my crime. Here’s what I learned: 🚫 Bad character letters: “Jason is a great guy.” (No proof.) “Please be lenient.” (Judges ignore this.) “I can’t believe Jason is in this situation.” (Comes across as denial.) ✅ Strong character letters: Told real stories about me—who I was before my crime, not just after. Came from people who knew me personally for years, not just acquaintances. Acknowledged what I did wrong but explained why I was more than my worst decision. The Letters That Mattered Most in My Case The most powerful letters came from: 1️⃣ A former colleague – He wrote about my work ethic and how I was the guy people relied on when things got tough. It showed I had real value. 2️⃣ A community member I had helped – Someone I volunteered with before sentencing shared how I had stepped up when others wouldn’t. That mattered. 3️⃣ My family—without begging – They wrote about what I had learned and how I was working to rebuild trust, not just how much they loved me. Judge Bennett mentioned that letters should never tell a judge what sentence to give. That’s a huge mistake. Judges hate when people try to do their job for them. How It Helped Me Get 28 Instead of 60 Months My judge didn’t skim through my letters. He referenced them in court. He saw that I wasn’t just someone trying to get out of trouble—I was someone who had built real relationships and had people who still believed in me. Without those letters, the prosecutor’s version of me might have been the only thing my judge had to work with. That’s why this matters. If You’re Facing Sentencing, Don’t Waste This Opportunity Most defendants do the bare minimum when it comes to character letters. They ask a few friends to type something up, never read them, and just hand them over. That’s a mistake. If you want your judge to see you as more than a case number, character letters need to be done right. I put serious effort into mine—and they played a role in helping me get home sooner. Will yours? /episode/index/show/compliancemitigation/id/35407650

The Best Decision I Made Before Sentencing 02/24/2025

The Best Decision I Made Before Sentencing Before I was sentenced, I knew I had to take control. I appreciated the guidance from my lawyer, but after watching Michael Santos interview judges—especially Judge Bennett—I realized I needed to do more. "Most defendants wait too long to show why they deserve leniency." That’s what Judge Bennett said, and I wasn’t about to make that mistake. I scheduled a call from my home in Tennessee and started working with White Collar Advice. That decision shaped everything that came next. What I Did That Made a Difference 1️⃣ Corrected my PSR – My pre-sentence investigation report (PSR) would follow me through sentencing, prison, and release. I went through it line by line and made sure it accurately reflected my story. 2️⃣ Built a real sentencing narrative – The government had its version of events. I made sure my judge saw who I really was—someone who took responsibility, had a plan, and wasn’t defined by one bad decision. 3️⃣ Prepared for allocution – I didn’t walk into court hoping for the best. I had a statement that showed accountability and a clear plan for what I would do next. That work helped me get 28 months instead of 60. Why I Walked Away from a Six-Figure Job to Join WCA I came home from Montgomery Federal Prison Camp in 10 months. That wasn’t luck—it was because I followed the plan I built with White Collar Advice. I was only on supervised release for a year, and within months, I had rebuilt my career. But something kept pulling at me. I knew how many people were walking into sentencing unprepared, hoping their lawyer would handle everything. I knew what it felt like to sit in that uncertainty. And I knew how much taking action mattered. So, I made the decision. I walked away from a six-figure sales job to join White Collar Advice. Because nothing is more important to me than helping others get through this experience with the best possible result. If You’re Facing Sentencing, Start Now 📅 Join our next webinar to learn what you should be doing today: [Webinar link] I didn’t wait until it was too late. You shouldn’t either. /episode/index/show/compliancemitigation/id/35407520

The Most Overlooked Sentencing Strategy—And Why It Helped Me Get 28 Months Instead of 60 02/19/2025

The Most Overlooked Sentencing Strategy—And Why It Helped Me Get 28 Months Instead of 60 Walking into my sentencing hearing, I knew I had one final shot to speak directly to the judge. No lawyers, no prosecutors—just me. Judge Mark Bennett has sentenced over 4,000 people. He made one thing clear in his interview: "Your final statement can move a sentence down—but only if done right." That’s allocution. It’s the moment when a judge hears from the person they’re about to sentence. And yet, most defendants blow it. I wasn’t going to be one of them. What Most People Get Wrong Judge Bennett said one of his biggest frustrations is when defendants don’t prepare for allocution. Some don’t say anything at all. Others make it worse by rambling about how hard this has been for them. I get it. When you’re standing there, waiting for a judge to decide your fate, it’s easy to panic or default to an apology. But that’s not what a judge is looking for. What I Said That Mattered I worked with White Collar Advice to craft an allocution that wasn’t just another apology. Here’s what I focused on: 1️⃣ Taking ownership: I acknowledged my crime—without excuses. Judges can tell when someone is shifting blame. I didn’t do that. 2️⃣ Recognizing the harm: I didn’t just talk about how this affected me. I addressed how my actions hurt others and what I had learned from it. 3️⃣ Proving I had a plan: I outlined exactly how I would spend my time inside—what programs I would take, what books I would read, how I would prepare for my release. Judge Bennett said something that stuck with me: "A real plan for rehabilitation makes a difference. Saying ‘I want to be a drug counselor’ doesn’t mean much unless you show you’ve already taken steps." So, I didn’t just say I wanted to be better. I showed that I was already doing the work. How It Changed My Sentence The prosecutor wanted me to serve 60 months. The judge gave me 28 months instead. That difference wasn’t luck—it was preparation. Had I walked into sentencing and just said, “I’m sorry, I’ve learned my lesson,” I doubt anything would have changed. Instead, I went in with a strategy—one that helped my judge see me as more than my charges. Your Sentencing is Coming—Will You Be Ready? Most people spend tens of thousands on legal fees but don’t spend a single hour preparing for allocution. I worked on mine for months, and it paid off. If you’re facing sentencing, ask yourself: What will your judge actually hear from you? Will it help—or will it be just another forgettable speech? Get ready now. Because once you’re standing in front of that judge, there are no do-overs. /episode/index/show/compliancemitigation/id/35354090

Why Your Judge Only Knows One Version of You (Unless You Fix It) 02/18/2025

Why Your Judge Only Knows One Version of You (Unless You Fix It) When I first walked into my sentencing hearing, I already knew what the prosecutor’s version of my life looked like. It was a list of mistakes, numbers, and accusations. It had nothing to do with who I actually was. —who sentenced over 4,000 people—said something in an interview that stuck with me: “Too often, judges never hear the defendant’s side. The government’s version is all they get, and most defendants don’t challenge it.” That hit me because I saw it happen in my own case. My lawyer, like most, treated my pre-sentence investigation report (PSR) like a formality. But here’s what I learned: that report wasn’t just paperwork. It was my first and best shot at making sure the judge saw me, not just the crime. Step 1: Read Your PSR Like Your Freedom Depends on It Because it does. The is the document that follows you through the entire system—your judge, probation officer, and even Bureau of Prisons (BOP) staff rely on it. Yet, most people barely glance at it before sentencing. I almost made that mistake too, but with White Collar Advice, I went through my PSR line by line. I found small but critical details that were either misleading or flat-out wrong. I corrected them before sentencing—because once that report is final, it’s nearly impossible to change. Step 2: Challenge the Government’s Narrative Judge Bennett made it clear: prosecutors submit their version of events, and most defense lawyers just accept it. I refused to let that happen. I wrote my own version of the events—one that took responsibility but also explained the circumstances of my case. I didn’t let the government be the only voice telling my story. Step 3: Show, Don’t Tell Saying you’ve changed means nothing without proof. Before sentencing, I had already started volunteering, showing the court that I wasn’t just saying I wanted to do better—I was already doing it. I didn’t wait to get to prison to start proving I could contribute. said he respects defendants who present a real plan, not just an apology: “I’d be astounded if a defendant had a real rehabilitation plan before sentencing.” I built a plan—how I would use my time inside, what programs I’d take, and how I’d prepare for release. My judge took it seriously. The Result? 28 Months Instead of 60 Because I put in the work, my judge saw me as more than the charges. I got 28 months instead of the 60 the government wanted. More than that, I went in with a plan, served just 10 months, and was home with only a year of supervision. If you’re facing sentencing, ask yourself this: Is your judge seeing who you actually are—or just what the prosecutor put on paper? If you don’t take control of your narrative, I assure you the government will. /episode/index/show/compliancemitigation/id/35338105

Developing a Nonprofit #19 03/01/2022

Responding to Challenges #18 03/01/2022

Confronting Challenges #17 03/01/2022

Personal Branding #16 03/01/2022

Personal Excellence, Part 3 #15 03/01/2022

Personal Excellence, Part 2#14 03/01/2022

Training for Excellence, Part 1 #13 03/01/2022

Team Training #12 03/01/2022

Aftermath #11 03/01/2022

Market Shifts #10 03/01/2022

Life is a Negotiation #9 03/01/2022

Scaling a Business #8 03/01/2022

Building a Career #7 03/01/2022

Career Development #6 03/01/2022

Never Stop #5 03/01/2022

Medical School #4 03/01/2022

Adversity #3 03/01/2022

Grade School #2 03/01/2022

Introduction #1 03/01/2022

60-Second Commercial Script 02/02/2021

30-Second Commercial Script 02/02/2021

3-We Did the Time So You Won't Have To—60-second commercial 01/13/2021

2. We did the time so you won't have to—30-second commercial 01/13/2021

1. Defrauding Investors and Consequences of White Collar Crime 01/11/2021

1. Defrauding Investors and Consequences of White Collar Crime Situation: This case study profiles Keith Berman, who served as the Chief Executive Officer of Decision Diagnostics Corp (DECN), a medical-device company based in California. The company traded common stock on the “OTC” market. According to the indictment, Berman misled investors about his own compensation. Prosecutors state that Berman’s misrepresentations were “material,” meaning that people may have made investment decisions based upon what Berman published. In early 2020, Berman and his company were experiencing financial difficulties. Berman wrote an email suggesting that he intended to exploit the global pandemic as an opportunity to deceive investors, allowing him “to raise millions.” Berman made false statements about DECN’s ability to develop and market a test that would detect whether a person had the coronavirus. He wrote press releases. He misrepresented news that he received from government officials, and he lied about what he learned from his business vendors. Despite a vendor telling Berman that the vendor’s product would not detect COVID-19, Berman continued to publish false and misleading information on message investor message boards describing his company. Berman created a fictitious account in an effort to conceal that he was behind the misrepresentations. As a result of Berman’s false and misleading statements, the company’s stock price rose by more than 1,500 percent. Investigators with the Securities and Exchange Commission questioned Berman under oath. Berman lied to the investigators. Prosecutors convened a grand jury in a federal district court. The grand jury is a group of citizens that listen to evidence investigators gathered to implicate Berman in federal crimes. The members of the grand jury voted to indict Berman for charges related to securities fraud, and to charges related to making a false statement to law enforcement officers. As a result of the criminal indictment, Berman faces the potential loss of liberty for up to 20 years, and he also may lose all of his personal property. Analysis: According to the information presented by the government, Berman made decisions with a clear intention to deceive investors. Although he may have lived most of his life as an honorable person, the evidence suggests that he got into financial trouble. Rather than responding to his troubles in an honorable way, he concocted a scheme to pump up the price of his stock. When government officials questioned him, Berman got himself into further trouble by lying in response to questions the investigators asked. Legislators passed securities laws to protect public markets. Anyone that attempts to manipulate those markets with false or misleading statements may face felony charges. Those charges can lead to decades in prison. With regard to making false statements, it’s important to know that a person does not have to respond to questions from a law-enforcement officer. On the other hand, if a person chooses to respond, he should tell the truth. Lying to a federal law enforcement officer is a federal crime, punishable by up to five years in federal prison—for each lie. A person may face criminal charges for lying to a federal officer regardless of whether the person is under oath. Keith Berman faces a difficult predicament as a result of the indictment for violating securities laws and making a false statement. The statutory penalty for securities fraud is 20 years in prison, and the statutory penalty for making a false statement is five years in prison. There are fines associated with such convictions, too. Judicial proceedings that follow will include a plea hearing. In most cases like Berman’s, defendants will choose to enter into a plea bargain with hopes of lessening the exposure to punishment. Prosecutors may agree to limit Berman’s exposure to prison, provided that he pleads guilty early and works on a mitigation strategy. If Berman pleads guilty, he will undergo a presentence investigation with a probation officer. The probation officer will complete a report, calculating a “loss amount” that will influence the sentence length. Berman will have to decide whether he wants to accept responsibility and plead guilty. He may choose to put the government to the test of proving the case to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. The decision he makes going forward will have monumental influences on his life. Depending on the plea or the outcome of a verdict, Berman could face decades in federal prison and enormous fines. With all of the evidence the government cited in the indictment, it would seem that prosecutors have a strong case. Like most defendants, he likely will plead guilty to avoid the downside of being convicted at trial. His best option will be to craft an effective mitigation strategy. That strategy should show the judge that Berman has a full grasp of the crime he committed. His mitigation strategy should show empathy for the victims of his crime, show what he learned from the experience, and help the judge understand what steps he is taking to make things right. Recommendation: The criminal indictment charges Berman with engineering a fraudulent scheme that he began at the dawn of the pandemic. Yet the indictment also insinuates his problems began long before he started the fraud. According to paragraph 8 of the indictment, he spent more than $360,000 of corporate funds to use webcams that would allow to participate in live chat sessions with people in foreign countries. Those expenditures likely led him into financial difficulties, putting pressures on him. Crime became a bad response to financial pressures that he created. Then, when confronted with the crime, he made things worse by lying. Keith Berman’s behavior mirrors the behavior of many people who have been convicted of white-collar crimes. They get into a bad situation. Then, normal people turn to criminal behavior, not understanding the consequences. We recommend more training to profile the personal stories of people that broke the law during the course of business. When people understand how authorities view crimes like securities fraud, or lying to federal officers, they may be more inclined to make law-abiding decisions. We like to say that people are innocent until proven guilty. At this stage, a grand jury has charged Keith Berman with serious crimes. We’ll see how the process unfolds. Risk Mitigation Qualify for Non-Prosecution Agreements by showing the story of your company’s journey, and yours.. Compliance Case Studies Compliance 101 Free 30-day sample of our course Compliance 101. Avoid government investigations. /episode/index/show/compliancemitigation/id/17502935

ComplianceMitigation's podcast

TOPICS