UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

V .

COLIN P . LINDSEY

DISTRICT O NEW NAM HIRE

r,rr a I zoos

FILED

Cr . No . 09-CR-52-01-PB

PLEA AGREEMENT

Pursuant to Rule 11 (c) (1) (B) of the Federal Rules of Criminal

Procedure, the United States of America, by its attorney, Thomas P .

Colantuono, the United States Attorney for the District of New

Hampshire, and the defendant, Colin P . Lindsey, and his attorneys,

Michael Connolly and James Ball, enter into the following Plea

Agreement :

1 . The Plea and Offenses .

The defendant agrees to waive prosecution by Indictment and

plead guilty to an Information charging him with two counts of mail

fraud, in violation of 18 U .S .C . §1341 . In exchange, the United

States (or "the government") agrees to the sentencing stipulations

that are identified in paragraph 6 of this agreement .

2 . Elements of the Offenses .

The defendant understands that if this case proceeded to trial

the government would be required to prove the following elements

beyond a reasonable doubt :

Mail Fraud

First, the defendant engaged in a scheme to

defraud and to obtain money by false and fraudulent

pretenses, representations or promises ;

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 1 of 21
Second, the defendant knowingly and willfully

participated in the scheme with the knowledge of

its fraudulent nature and a specific intent to

defraud ; and

Third, in execution of that scheme, the

defendant used or caused the use of mails as

specified in the Information . '

3 . Offenae Conduct .

The government and the defendant agree that the offenses

were committed as follows :

Background

From approximately September 2003, to February 2008, the

defendant was the owner, president and Chairman of the Board

of Directors of Noble Trust Co . ("NTC"), a non-depository

financial institution that was chartered under the laws of the

State of New Hampshire . Among other things, the defendant

provided investment advice and executed investment decisions

on behalf of NTC's clients, to whom the defendant owed a

fiduciary duty .

From approximately June 2004, to approximately September

2007, a number of NTC's clients' funds were held in a product

that was created and managed by the defendant, the Noble

Alternative Income Fund ("NAIF") . Each client for whom an

NAIF account was established ("NAIF account holder") was told

by the defendant that their money would be invested in an

account that was earning annual interest payments of at least

12 percent, which, at the account holder's option, would be

paid on a periodic basis or as a lump sum when the account was

closed .

The defendant used funds held in the NAIF accounts to

make separate loans to a company in Colorado, Sierra

Factoring, Inc . ("Sierra") . Reportedly, Sierra used the loans

it received from NTC to purchase accounts receivable from

I United States v . Montiminy , 936 F .2d 626, 627 (1st Cir .

1991) .

Page 2 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 2 of 21
other companies and to make loans to small businesses . Z

In general, in exchange for each fixed term, 12 percent

loan, Sierra paid a one time up-front commission to NTC equal

to 8 percent of the loan . In addition, each NAIF account

holder paid an annual management fee to NTC that was equal to

1 .2 percent of the current market value of his/her account, as

determined by the defendant .

The defendant caused account statements to be prepared

and mailed to NAIF account holders four times each year . The

general purpose for each statement was to identify

transactions that occurred in an account during the period

covered by the statement, and to state the current market

value of the account at the end of the period covered by the

statement .

The promissory notes Sierra issued to NTC for each loan

obligated Sierra to make periodic loan repayments to NTC . If

Sierra had fulfilled its obligations under the notes, NTC

would have used the money it received from Sierra to make

interest payments to NAIF account holders .

Sierra's last payment to NTC was made in August 2006 .

During the next few months, the defendant's confidence in

Sierra waned and his communications with Sierra became more

urgent and confrontational, and NTC's ability to make payment s

2 A number of NTC's clients provided funds to the NAIF

through irrevocable charitable remainder uni-trusts ("charitable

trusts" or "trusts") that were created by the defendant . For

each trust, the defendant or NTC acted as the trustee . An

irrevocable charitable trust can be created when a person or

entity sells the ownership of a non-cash asset to a trust for

which a non-profit organization is named as the ultimate

beneficiary . While the creator of the trust is alive, the income

that is earned by the trust is paid to him . The income that is

earned by the trust is not subject to federal capital gains tax

if : (a) the trust is not revoked, (b) it generates annual income

to the creator of the trust in an amount that is not less than

five percent or more than fifteen percent of the net fair market

value of the trust's assets, and (c) the income is paid to the

creator of the trust no less often than annually . When the

creator of the trust dies, the trust is dissolved and its assets

are transferred to its ultimate charitable beneficiary .

Page 3 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 3 of 21
to existing NAIF account holders appeared to be severely

compromised .

In the fall of 2006, Sierra offered to settle its

outstanding obligations to NTC by transferring $5 million in

used equipment and $10 million in preferred stock in another

company, DLR Funding, to NTC . The defendant rejected that

offer and rather than disclose that Sierra had not been making

payments, he sued Sierra .

Beginning in October 2006, the defendant used money that

belonged to new customers of NTC to make payments to existing

NAIF account holders, in violation of the duty he owed to the

new customers .3 The defendant also formulated plans to

replace the $15 million that was loaned to Sierra, using

commissions from the sale of high value insurance policies .

Count One

In particular, after Sierra stopped making payments to

NTC in 2006, the defendant used approximately $781,000 that

belonged to the new NTC customers who are identified below to

make to make payments to existing NAIF account holders, in

violation of the fiduciary duty the defendant owed to the new

clients :

New NTC Client

Date o f

Payment

Amount

Paid

Existing NAIF

Account Holder

Thackson Charitable 10/23/07 $200,000 LF Limited

Remainder Uni-Trust Partnership

DILO Livestock 01/03/07 30,000 Ordwa y

Charitable Remainder Investmen t

Uni-Trust ("CRT") Management

Account ("IMA" )

DILO Livestock 01/10/07 17,500 Sweeney CRT

Lane IMA 02/13/07 2,000 VFW Post 854 1

3 In January 2008, the New Hampshire Banking Commission

conducted an audit of NTC . During the audit, bank examiners

determined that NTC used false information in quarterly,

regulatory reports it submitted to the Banking Commission on

behalf of NTC to conceal Sierra's true ability to repay the loans

it received from NTC and the true value of the NAIF accounts .

Page 4 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 4 of 21
New NTC Client

Date o f

Payment

Amouat

Paid

Existing NAIF

Account Holder

VFW District 20 IMA 06/07/07 21,000 Stylianos Sinani s

VFW District 7110 IMA 06/07/07 25,000 Stylianos Sinani s

James H . Mosier IMA 06/07/07 40,250 Stylianos Sinani s

TSL Hawke CRT 06/07/07 28,000 Stylianos Sinani s

Patricia Janoush IMA 06/07/07 17,000 Stylianos Sinani s

Texas VFW Post 8550 06/07/07 10,000 Stylianos Sinani s

Merrill R . Jones IMA 06/07/07 4,750 Stylianos Sinani s

David Fedeles IMA 06/07/07 5,000 Stylianos Sinani s

Carpenter IMA

Manager Account

06/07/07 5,000 Stylianos Sinani s

Michael Gaulden CRT 07/18/07 53,700 Mendola IMFi

Michael Gaulden CRT 07/31/07 100,000 Arnone IMA

Michael Gaulden CRT 07/31/07 16,700 Shurtleff IMA

John L . Trottnow

Revocable Trust ("RT")

09/17/07 10,000 Holden IMA

Trottnow RT 09/17/07 10,000 VFW Post 7782

Trottnow RT 09/17/07 17,000 VFW Post 776 8

Trottnow RT 09/17/07 2,475 VFW Post 907 8

Trottnow RT 09/17/07 13,000 Travis County

Council Flag

Fund IMA

Trottnow RT 09/17/07 6,000 Young America

Creative

Patriotic Art

Trottnow RT 09/18/07 101,189 Hopkins IMA

Page 5 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 5 of 21
Date of Amount Existing NAIF

New NTC Client PaYment Paid Account Holder

Trottnow RT 09/19/07 46,000 VFW 20 and 7110

$781,564

During that period, the defendant concealed the fact that

he used money that belonged to new clients to make payments to

existing NAIF account holders by causing misleading quarterly

account statements to be mailed to each new client, which

falsely reported that the current market value of each account

was at least equal to the amount of money that was originally

placed in it .

Count Two

From approximately August 2006 to the present, the

defendant has been a principal of an insurance agency in

Manchester, New Hampshire, Balcarres Group, LLC ("Balcarres") .

Balcarres sold a number of high value life insurance policies

for Phoenix Life Insurance Company, AXA Insurance Company, and

Penn Life Insurance Company ("the insurance companies") .

The face value of a high value life insurance policy

("policy") is between $5 million and $15 million . To qualify

for a policy an applicant must, among other things, be at

least 70 years old, have a personal financial net worth that

is at least equal to the value of the policy he intends to

purchase, and have neither an agreement nor an intention to

sell the policy at the time he applies for it . Assuming that

a policy is lawfully and properly issued, it may, under the

appropriate circumstances, be sold for a substantial sum of

money in the so-called "Life Settlement secondary market . "

There are a number of grounds upon which an insurance

company is entitled to rescind a policy during the first two

years of the policy's existence . Thereafter, an insurance

company's ability to rescind a policy is substantially

restricted . Accordingly, a policy's market value

substantially increases after its "two year contestability"

period expires .

The owner of a policy must pay premiums totaling several

hundred thousand dollars each year . The premiums can be paid

by an insurance premium finance company that is approved by an

insurance company . The finance company is repaid, with

interest, when the policy is sold or from the benefits of the

Page 6 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 6 of 21
policy when the insured dies .

When an NTC customer purchased a policy through

Balcarres, the insurance company paid an up-front commission

to Balcarres that ranged from approximately 80 % to 112% of the

premiums that are paid during the first year of the policy's

existence . °

In addition to the conduct described in Count One, the

defendant attempted to replace the impaired Sierra investments

before the NAIF account holders learned their money had been

lost, through the sale of high value insurance policies, some

of which were fraudulent . In that regard, in approximately

August 2006, the defendant agreed to pay a fee to a resident

of Odessa, Florida ("the Florida resident") each time the

Florida resident referred a person who ultimately purchased a

policy through Balcarres . To earn his fee, the Florida

resident was required to provide financial statements and

other documents to the defendant to demonstrate that an

applicant for the policy had a personal financial net worth

that was at least equal to the face value of the policy he/she

wished to purchase .

From approximately October 2006, to approximately October

2007, the Florida resident induced a number of people to

submit applications for policies to the insurance companies,

in part, by assuring the potential applicants that the

premiums for their policy would be entirely financed by NTC or

other entities .

Before each application was submitted, the defendant, the

Florida resident, and each applicant agreed that the

applicant's policy would be owned by a trust, and that the

beneficial interest in the trust would be sold to NTC for an

agreed upon amount of money that would be paid to the insured

by the Florida resident .

In addition, the Florida resident provided materiall y

" Some of those policies were owned by Irrevocable Life

Insurance Trusts ("ILIT") for which the defendant or NTC acted as

the trustee . An ILIT is typically created for estate planning

purposes . Its only asset is a life insurance policy . The

benefits of the policy are paid to the trust's beneficiary when

the person who created the trust, the grantor, dies . The

beneficiary is not required to pay estate taxes on the benefits .

Page 7 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 7 of 21
false information regarding each applicant's personal

financial status to the defendant . At some point, the

defendant came to know that the applicants' personal financial

infonnation was falsified . Nevertheless, he caused the

infonnation to be mailed with applications for policies to the

insurance companies .

Through that conduct, the defendant received commissions

in the following amounts :

Insurance

Comoanv

Policy

Number

Balcarres '

Commisaion

Amount Paid to

Florida Resident

Net to

Halcarree

AXA 157215761 $439,840 .00 $0 $439,840 .0 0

Phoenix 97520809 884,075 .32' 110,000 524,075 .3 2

Phoenix 97519990 250,00 0

AXA 157218193 402,450 .00 200,000 202,450 .0 0

Phoenix 7521964 511,816 .80 300,000 211,816 .8 0

Penn 8192490 1,035,000 .00 300,000 735,000 .0 0

Phoenix 97521740 170,367 .47 90,000 80,367 .4 7

Penn 8191171 154,530 .00 50,000 104,530 .0 0

Phoenix 97521456 483,010 .00 200,000 283,010 .0 1

Phoenix 97524167 607,464 .00 125,000 482,464 .0 0

Phoenix 97520807 499,209 .72 200,000 299,209 .7 2

Phoenix 97523067 411 .763 .05 300,000 111,763 .0 5

$5,599,526 .36 $2,125,000 $3,474,526 .3 6

The defendant used the commissions that were retained by

Balcarres' to (a) make periodic payments to some NAIF account

holders, (b) return money to NAIF account holders when their

accounts closed, and (c) finance (through Balcarres) high

value policies that were purchased by other people .

4 . Maximum Penalties .

The defendant understands that the maximum penalties for

the offenses are :

5 $884,075 .00 commission for two policies .

Page 8 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 8 of 21
A . A term of imprisonment of 20 years (18 U .S .C .

1341 and 12 U .S .C . §3401(1) ;

B . A fine of $250,000, or twice gross gain or gross

loss caused by the offense, whichever is greater

(18 U .S .C . §§ 1341, 3571(b)(3) and 3571(d)) ;

C . A possible additional fine to pay the costs to the

government of probation (U .S .S .G . § 5E1 .1(2)) ;

D . A mandatory special assessment of $200 .00 ($100 .00

for each offense of conviction), which the

defendant agrees to pay at or before the time of

sentencing ; and

E . A term of supervised release of not more than five

years . The defendant understands that his failure

to comply with any of the conditions of supervised

release may result in revocation of supervised

release, requiring him to serve in prison all or

part of the term of supervised release, with no

credit for time already spent on supervised release

(18 U .S .C . §3583) .

5 . Sentencina and Auplication of the Sentencing Guidelines .

The defendant understands that the Sentencing Reform Ac t

of 1984 applies in this case and that the Court is required to

consider the United States Sentencing Guidelines as advisory

guidelines . The defendant further understands that he has no

right to withdraw his guilty pleas if the applicable advisory

guideline range or his sentence is other than what he

anticipated, except as expressly provided in this Plea

Agreement .

The defendant also understands that the United States and

the United States Probation Office shall :

A . Advise the Court of any additional, relevant facts

that are presently known or may subsequently come

Page 9 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 9 of 21
to their attention ;

B . Respond to questions from the Court ;

C . Correct any inaccuracies in the pre-sentence

report ; and/or

D . Respond to any statements made by the defendant to

a probation officer or to the Court .

The defendant understands that the United States and the

Probation Office may address the Court with respect to an

appropriate sentence to be imposed in this case .

The defendant is aware that any estimate of the probable

sentence or the probable sentencing range relating to him

pursuant to the advisory Sentencing Guidelines that he may

have received from any source is only a prediction and not a

promise, and is not binding on the United States, the

Probation Office, or the Court, except as expressly provided

in this Plea Agreement .

6 . Sentencing Agreements .

The defendant understands that the Court will, with the

aid of the pre-sentence investigation report, determine the

facts that are relevant to sentencing .

Pursuant to Fed . R . Crim . P . 11(c)(1)(B) and U .S .S .G .

56B1 .4, the government and the defendant agree :

A . For purposes of U .S .S .G . §2B21 . 1 (b) (1) ( ), the loss

caused by the offenses is greater than $2 .5 million

and less than $7 million ; and

B . For purposes of U .S .S .G . §3B1 .3, the offenses

involved the defendant's abuse of a position o f

Page 10 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 10 of 21
trust .

The defendant understands that the government may argue

that other sentencing enhancements should be applied in this

case, and he is permitted to object to them .

The government will not request an upward departure or

variance from the advisory guideline sentencing range, as

determined by the sentencing court .

The defendant may request a downward departure and/or

variance from the advisory guideline sentencing range, as

determined by the sentencing court .

The government and the defendant are free to make

recommendations with respect to terms of imprisonment, fines,

conditions of supervised release, and any other penalties,

requirements, and conditions of sentencing as each party may

deem lawful and appropriate unless such recommendations are

inconsistent with the terms of this Plea Agreement .

The defendant understands that the sentencing court is

not bound by the foregoing agreements but with the aid of a

pre-sentence report, will determine the facts relevant to

sentencing . The defendant understands that if the sentencing

Court does not accept the foregoing agreements, such rejection

by the Court will not be a basis for him to withdraw his pleas

of guilty .

7 . Acceptance of Resooneibilitv .

Page 11 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 11 of 21
The government agrees that it will not oppose an

appropriate reduction in the defendant's Adjusted Offense

Level, under the Sentencing Guidelines, based upon the

defendant's apparent prompt recognition and affirmative

acceptance of responsibility for the offense . The government,

however, may oppose any adjustment for Acceptance of

Responsibility if the defendant :

A . Fails to admit a complete factual basis for the

plea at the time he is sentenced or at any other

time ;

B . Challenges the "Offense Conduct" as described in

paragraph 3 of this Agreement at any time after the

pleas are entered ;

C . Denies involvement in the offense ;

D . Gives conflicting statements about that involvement

or is untruthful with the Court, the United States

or the Probation Office ;

E . Fails to give complete and accurate information

about the defendant's financial status to the

Probation Office ;

F . Obstructs or attempts to obstruct justice, prior to

sentencing ;

G . Has engaged in conduct prior to signing this Plea

Agreement which reasonably could be viewed as

obstruction or an attempt to obstruct justice, and

has failed to fully disclose such conduct to the

United States prior to signing this Plea Agreement ;

H . Fails to appear in court as required ;

I . After signing this Plea Agreement, engages in

additional criminal conduct ;

J . Attempts to withdraw the plea of guilty ;

Page 12 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 12 of 21
K . within fourteen days of pleading guilty to the

offenses, fails to submit a sworn, truthful and

complete personal financial affidavit to the

government and the New Hampshire Banking

Commissioner (as Liquidator for Noble Trust

Company) that : (1) identifies the defendant's

current direct and/or indirect ownership interests

in all assets, property and/or money, (2)

identifies all transfers of any such asset,

property and/or money that occurred within four

years of the date the financial statement is sworn

to and signed by the defendant ; and (3)

specifically identifies the assets, property and/or

money that were transferred, and the identity of

the person and/or entity to whom the transfer(s)

was made ; and/or

L . Within forty-five calendar days of pleading guilty

to the offenses, fails to assent and agreed to a

civil judgment in the Liquidation Proceeding in

favor of the New Hampshire Banking Commissioner (in

his capacity as NTC's Liquidator), against

Balcarres, through which the ownership of all

assets, property and money that are owned by

Balcarres are transferred to the New Hampshire

Banking Commissioner (in his capacity as NTC's

Liquidator), in partial satisfaction of the

Liquidator's claims against the defendant and

Balcarres .

If the defendant's offense level is sixteen or greater, and he

has assisted the United States in the investigation or prosecution

of the defendant's own misconduct by timely notifying the United

States of his intention to enter a plea of guilty, thereby

permitting the United States to avoid preparing for trial and

permitting the United States and the Court to allocate their

resources efficiently, the United States will move, at or before

sentencing, to decrease the defendant's base offense level by an

additional one level pursuant to U .S .S .G . § 3E1 .1(b) .

The defendant understands and agrees that he may not withdra w

Page 13 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 13 of 21
his guilty plea if, for any of the reasons listed above, the

government does not recommend that he receive a reduction in the

defendant's sentence for acceptance of responsibility .

The defendant also understands and agrees that the Court is

under no obligation to reduce the offense level if it finds that he

has not accepted responsibility .

B . Substantial Aesistaace .

If the defendant provides substantial assistance in the

investigation or prosecution of another person who has committed an

offense, the government may file a motion pursuant to U .S .S .G .

§5K1 .1 and 16 U .S .C . §3553(e) advising the sentencing Court of all

relevant facts pertaining to that determination and requesting the

Court to sentence the defendant in light of the factors set forth

in §5K1 . 1 (a) (1) - (5) .

The defendant understands that the determination of whether to

file such a motion rests solely with the United States . This means

that the United States may or may not file a motion under U .S .S .G .

§5K1 .1 or 18 U .S .C . §3553(e) . The decision whether to file such a

motion will depend on the United States' evaluation of any

assistance provided by the defendant . The defendant also

understands that even if such a motion is filed, the Court is under

no obligation to grant or act favorably upon the motion . It is

understood that the sentence to be imposed remains within the

discretion of the sentencing court .

Page 14 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 14 of 21
9 . Restitution and Diachareabilitv .

The defendant understands that he will be required to make

restitution to the victims of the offenses . See 18 U .S .C . §§ 3663

and 3663A . The defendant also acknowledges and consents that his

obligations to pay restitution shall not be dischargeable in any

case commenced by or against him under the United States Bankruptcy

Code (11 U .S .C . §101 et seq .) .

10 . Waiver of Trial Rights and Conaeouencea of Plea .

The defendant understands that he has the right to be

represented by an attorney at every stage of the proceeding and, if

necessary, one will be appointed to represent him . The defendant

also understands that he has the right :

A . To plead not guilty or to maintain that plea if it

has already been made ;

B . To be tried by a jury and, at that trial, the right

to the assistance of counsel ;

C . To confront and cross-examine witnesses against

him ;

D . Not be compelled to provide testimony that may

incriminate him ; and

E . To compulsory process for the attendance of

witnesses to testify in his defense .

The defendant understands that by pleading guilty he waives

and gives up those rights and that if a plea of guilty is accepted

by the Court, there will not be a trial of any kind .

The defendant understands that if he pleads guilty, the Court

may ask him about the offense, and if he answers any of thos e

Page 15 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 15 of 21
questions falsely his answers may later be used to prosecute him

for perjury or making false statements .

11 . Use of Certain Information .

Provided the defendant gives truthful, accurate and complete

information, the government agrees, pursuant to U .S .S .G . §

1B1 .8(a), that any self-incriminating information provided by the

defendant which was not known by the government, or which the

government could not establish by a preponderance of the evidence

at the time of the defendant 's briefings, shall not be used in

determining the advisory guideline range . This Plea Agreement is

subject to the § 1B1 .8(b) exceptions and reserves to the government

the ability to make derivative use of the defendant's statements .

12 . Acknowledgment of Guilt ; Voluntariness of Plea .

The defendant acknowledges that he :

A . Is entering into this Plea Agreement and is

pleading guilty freely and voluntarily because he

is guilty ;

B . Is entering into this Plea Agreement without

reliance upon any discussions with the government

and without promise of benefit of any kind except

as described in this Plea Agreement ;

C . Is entering into this Plea Agreement without threats,

force, intimidation, or coercion of any kind ;

D . Understands of the nature of the offenses to which

he is pleading guilty, including the penalties

provided by law ; and

Page 16 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 16 of 21
E . Is completely satisfied with the representation and

advice he has received from his undersigned

attorneys .

13 . Scope of Aareement .

The defendant understands and agrees that this Agreement is

limited to the undersigned parties and cannot bind any other

federal authority, or any state or local authority, including the

Liquidator, and shall not be used in any way to prejudice, limit or

otherwise restrict the Liquidator's claims regarding the

defendant's civil liability for the offense conduct and losses that

are identified in 93 of this agreement . The defendant acknowledges

that no representations have been made to him with respect to any

civil or administrative consequences that may result from this plea

of guilty, because such matters are solely within the discretion of

the specific administrative or governmental entity involved .

Finally, the defendant acknowledges that this Agreement has been

reached without regard to any civil tax matters that may be pending

or which may arise involving him .

14 . Satiefaction of Federal Criminal Liability ; Breach .

The defendant's guilty plea, if accepted by the Court, will

satisfy any federal criminal liability of the defendant in the

District of New Hampshire as a result of his conduct which forms

the basis of the Information in this case .

The defendant also understands that if, before sentencing, he

violates any term or condition of this Agreement, engages in any

criminal activity, or fails to appear for sentencing, the

government may void this Agreement . Should either party violate

Page 17 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 17 of 21
the terms of this Agreement, the other party shall have the option

of declaring the Agreement null and void .

15 . Waivers .

A . Appeal and Collateral Review .

The defendant is aware that he has the right to challenge his

sentence and guilty plea on direct appeal . He is also aware that

he may, in some circumstances, be able to argue that his guilty

pleas should be set aside, or his sentence be set aside or reduced,

in a collateral challenge (such as pursuant to a motion under 28

U .S .C . § 2255 or § 2241) .

By entering into this Plea Agreement, the defendant knowingly

and voluntarily waives any right to appeal or to collaterally

challenge :

1 . His guilty pleas and any other aspect of his

convictions, including, but not limited to, any

rulings on pretrial suppression motions or any

other pretrial dispositions of motions and issues ;

and

2 . The defendant's sentence imposed by the Court if

within the guideline range determined by the Court,

or lower, or the Court's imposition of the minimum

mandatory sentence .

The defendant's waiver of rights to appeal and to bring

collateral challenges shall not apply to appeals or challenge s

Page 18 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 18 of 21
based on new legal principles in First Circuit or Supreme Court

cases decided after the date of this Plea Agreement which are held

by the First Circuit or Supreme Court to have retroactive effect .

The defendant's waiver of the right to collateral review does not

extend to claims that the plea was unknowing or involuntary or to

claims that he received ineffective assistance of counsel in the

negotiation of the plea or plea agreement .

This Plea Agreement does not affect the rights or obligations

of the United States as set forth in 18 U .S .C . § 3742(b), and the

United States therefore retains its appeal rights .

B . Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts .

The defendant hereby waives all rights, whether asserted

directly or through a representative, to request or receive from

any department or agency of the United States any records

pertaining to the investigation or prosecution of this case,

including without limitation any records that may be sought under

the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U .S .C . §552, or the Privacy Act

of 1974, 5 U .S .C . §522a .

16 . No Other Promises .

The defendant acknowledges that no other promises, agreements,

or conditions have been entered into other than those set forth in

this Plea Agreement or revealed to the Court, and none will be

entered into unless set forth in writing, signed by all parties,

and submitted to the Court .

17 . Final Bindina Aareement .

Page 19 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 19 of 21
None of the terms of this Plea Agreement shall be binding on

the United States until this Plea Agreement is signed by the

defendant, a lawyer who represents the defendant and by the United

States Attorney for the District of New Hampshire, or an Assistant

United States Attorney .

18 . Aareemeat Provisions Not Severable .

The government and the defendant understand and agree that if

any provision of this Plea Agreement is deemed invalid or

unenforceable, as to the government and the defendant, then the

entire Plea Agreement is null and void and no part of it may be

enforced .

Page 20 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 20 of 21
Thomas Colantuono

United tates

e

Attorney

By : LL.'+ A^ '!j )` Date:

Z

/'

AD -1r,

Robert M . Kinsella

Assistant U .S . Attorne

/ i

'k

By . Date : -2 i -O•<

Elizabeth Baker

Special Assistant United States Attorney

I hereby certify that I have read this 21-page Plea Agreement,

I have fully discussed it with my lawyers and I fully understand

and accept its terms .

Colin P . i dsew Defendant

Date : H' ZI-O1

We have read and explained this 21-page Plea Agreement to our

client, Colin P . Lindsey, and he has advised us that he understands

and accepts its terms .

Jamesi6a'Il, Esq .

Attoi/ney for Colin Lindsey

Date :

Date :

21 - P4 Ip r- 0 9

Page 21 of 21

Case 1:09-cr-00052-PB Document 10 Filed 04/21/09 Page 21 of 21