Talk:Stephen Yagman

Convictions

There is absolutely no reason why there should not be a section detailing the offenses for which Yagman was convicted in 2007. If any of the cases that Yagman fought are noteworthy, then it is equally noteworthy that he is a convicted criminal. Considering the amount of times that Yagman has accused law-abiding officers of misconduct, and that several of these cases are listed in the article, it is ABSOLUTELY RELEVANT that Yagman is himself a convicted criminal. Without this section in the article, the article lacks any shred of neutrality. I can see that in the history, these facts have been removed from the article- One can only assume that this was done by Yagman or some associate of his rather than by an editor intending the best interest of this article.

The previous versions of this article only list his positive accomplishments. It would seem to me that without his convictions, this article reads more like a business card for Yagman and his firm- we are not here to promote ourselves, Stephen. If these facts are removed again, the neutrality of this article WILL be in dispute, and I will personally flag this article for deletion as self-promotion. Without listing ALL relevant facts about Yagman, including his conviction for fraud etc, this article amounts to nothing more than shameless SELF-PROMOTION perpetrated by an inmate with too much time on his hands. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.43.1 (talk) 21:33, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

There is no need for a citation after the Armster case, because what is quoted is from THAT case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.170.27.57 (talk) 20:44, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Disbarment

Perhaps your comment should have been a little more specific. Yagman has indeed been disbarred in New York as a result of his federal convictions. However, he is currently only under an interim suspension imposed by the State Bar of California. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.176.213.202 (talk) 04:41, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Per documents filed by the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel of the California State Bar, summary disbarment will be requested once the conviction becomes final (all appeals are exhausted.) The documents can be viewed at http://members.calbar.ca.gov/courtDocs/06-C-13000.pdf 24.176.213.143 (talk) 20:52, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Removal of fraud conviction

Please look at the history for this article. For many months, various IPs and anons have been removing Yagman's fraud conviction without any comment. I am not one of those Internet conspiracy kooks, but at this point, in 2010, I believe there is a concerted, orchestrated effort to hide the truth and protect his reputation. It's sad to see that Wikipedia admins are still reverting this stuff without any comment beyond "good faith edit" — clearly, by now, they are not good-faith edits but intentional malicious damage to hide the unsavoury truth about Yagman. 81.152.72.174 (talk) 21:16, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

You cannot delete sourced information because you don't like it. If this continues I will have the page protected and refer you to WP:ANI as a possible vandal. You may be too close to Yagman to edit this article effectively and in accordance with MOS and BLP. Quis separabit? 01:13, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Tag reverts

What's up with the IP 76.175.73.87 that keeps removing the date from the COI tag? --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:20, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism. Quis separabit? 18:23, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Suggestions

This could use some editing to improve the writing and sourcing. The lead sentence explaining the issue is long, and there are no linked sources:

Yagman contended that the IRS had selectively and vindictively prosecuted him, ignoring the difference between tax avoidance, which is legal, and tax evasion, which is not,[4] because, as Idaho Special Prosecutor (1997–2001), he prosecuted homicide charges against FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi for allegedly murdering Vicki Weaver at Ruby Ridge, Idaho in 1992[5] and because on January 19, 2002 he brought the first Guantanamo Bay detainee case and won it on December 18, 2003.[6]

This could be used to make the lead easier to understand.

[email protected], the material you're restoring has been copied from the source, so it would have to be written. Sarah ^(talk) 02:16, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Most recent suspicious edits

More suspicious editing going on. Article needs protection. This source confirms $100,000 figure. Quis separabit? 14:50, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

IP edits continued

It seems that an IP close to Yagman has been trying to remove the details of criminality from this article for 10 years now. The article has today again been page protected. The IP range probably needs to be blocked permanently. The saga continues. Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:43, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 June 2021

ADD to bottom of 'Legal Career' section statement that: Stephen G Yagman has recently (26 May 2021) been reinstated as an attorney of the State Bar of California by the Supreme Court of California upon recommendation of the State Bar Court. (search for SBC-19-R-30724 at )

direct link to reinstatement order may or may not function: 192.64.159.10 (talk) 15:47, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: This needs a source saying that he actually was reinstated, not that he could be reinstated if he paid the fees and took the oath. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:16, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 31 July 2021

Stephen Yagman no longer is a disbarred lawyer. He was reinstated as a member of the California Bar on June 11, 2021, as a member of the Bar in good standing. See Cal. State Bar website, under his name. 2603:8000:AE44:100:2875:4A68:CC25:65A6 (talk) 16:37, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: See my answer above. No evidence he's reinstated, just that he could be. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:46, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 July 2022

On May 29, 2022, Yagman was ordered by a unanimous California Supreme Court to be readmitted to the California Bar. Syagman (talk) 23:37, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:52, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2023

In the section titled "criminal conviction" I believe a second paragraph should be added to reflect that Mr. Yagman served 29 months in prison and then worked as a paralegal and lecturer for 11 years before passing the bar exam again and winning a decision from the California State Bar Court that reinstated his law license in 2021. He is currently practicing law again and defending homeless clients as well as victims of police brutality and racial profiling.

This information is gathered from a LA Times Article titled "A fraud conviction ended his battles for civil rights. 14 years later, Stephen Yagman is back." Specifically two paragraphs that read "He abruptly disappeared from the public stage after his 2007 conviction for tax evasion, bankruptcy fraud and money laundering. After serving 29 months in federal prison, he stayed largely out of sight for 11 years as a paralegal and lecturer.

Yet to the astonishment of those who might have welcomed his absence, Yagman has risen from his ashes and is once again brandishing the law. At 76, he has repassed the California bar exam — on his third try — and won a judgment in the State Bar Court of California to have his license reinstated."

Info358 (talk) 23:37, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

References

 Not done for now: Please draft specific language to propose including in this article, referencing reliable sources, and state where specifically it should be inserted. You can either reactivate this request when reporting the specific language here, or create a new request. -- Pinchme123 (talk) 02:05, 6 October 2023 (UTC)