United States v. Tarallo

Aldo Tarallo (defendant) worked as a telemarketer in a fraudulent investment scheme, reading company-provided scripts that made false promises to potential investors, and separately lied to investors about his office's location to make the operation look bigger. Another telemarketer testified it was obvious the scripts' risk-free promises were false. Charged with securities fraud, Tarallo claimed he didn't know his statements were false. The trial judge instructed the jury that Tarallo was guilty if he made false statements knowing they were false or with reckless indifference to their truth, and that he didn't need to know his actions were unlawful — while also, confusingly, telling the jury "willfully" and "knowingly" meant the same thing. Convicted, Tarallo appealed, challenging these instructions.