Todd Ryan Frazier, Former School Business Official and Treasurer, of the Carterville School District Charged by in a Federal Indictment Alleging Embezzlement, Wire Fraud, False Statements, and Other Federal Crimes

May 12, 2013

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on May 10, 2013 released the following:

“Todd Ryan Frazier, 30, of Grand Rapids, Michigan, was indicted by a grand jury and charged in a 16-count indictment with

  • counts 1—3, embezzlement and theft from the Carterville School District—a unit of local government that received federal funds;
  • counts 4—13, wire fraud in furtherance of a scheme to defraud the Carterville School District;
  • count 14, false statements to the Federal Bureau of Investigation;
  • count 15, attempting to access a computer of a financial institution without authorization;
  • count 16, uttering a forged check of the Carterville School District, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Illinois, Stephen R. Wigginton, announced today. The offenses each carry a total statutory maximum sentence of up to 250 years in prison, a fine of up to $3,400,000 and mandatory restitution.

The indictment alleges that Todd Ryan Frazier, from August 2008 and continuing through February 2012, engaged in a scheme to defraud the Carterville School District, Unit 5, in Williamson County, Illinois, while he was the School Business Official which included the duties and responsibilities to act as the treasurer and payroll officer for the district. The indictment further alleges that Todd Ryan Frazier lied to the Federal Bureau of Investigation during its investigation when he stated that he had not stolen money from the Carterville School District, nor did he make any false entries into Carterville School District’s payroll system.

An indictment is a formal charge against a defendant. Under the law, a defendant is presumed to be innocent of a charge and is entitled to a fair trial at which the government must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The indictment is the result of an investigation conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The prosecution is being handled by Assistant U.S. Attorney Norman R. Smith.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
Federal Criminal Defense Attorneys Videos:

Federal Crimes – Be Careful

Federal Crimes – Be Proactive

Federal Crimes – Federal Indictment

Federal Crimes – Detention Hearing

Federal Mail Fraud Crimes

————————————————————–

To find additional federal criminal news, please read Federal Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.


Man Allegedly Claiming to be the Son of the President of the Congo Indicted for Federal Wire Fraud Crimes

May 10, 2013

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on May 9, 2013 released the following:

“SAN FRANCISCO— Earlier this week, a federal grand jury in San Francisco indicted Blessed Marvelous Herve, a/k/a Rodrigue Herve Ngandou, a/k/a Herve Rodrigue Ngandou, a/k/a Blessed Roll Herve, of San Francisco, for wire fraud, United States Attorney Melina Haag announced.

According to the indictment, Herve, 41, devised and executed a scheme to defraud victims of approximately $1.6 million. Herve claimed that his father was the president of the Congo and a multi-billionaire, but that the United States government had seized Herve’s assets, in excess of $43,000,000. Herve promised to pay bonus sums of more than $1,500,000 to victims in exchange for the victims’ financial support of Herve’s quest to obtain the $43,000,000 that the government purportedly had seized.

Herve also claimed that as a result the federal court case involving his seized funds, he was sent to federal prison from 2009 through 2012. During this time, Herve solicited funds from victims to assist with his alleged ongoing court proceedings and his incarceration. Herve again promised full repayment of victims’ money plus large bonuses upon the completion of his federal case and release of his funds. Specifically, in October 2012, Herve solicited and received $47,000 from a victim by falsely claiming that he needed the money to pay the Internal Revenue Service to satisfy the final judgment entered against him.

According to a criminal complaint filed in the same matter further, one of the victims was a real estate agent to whom Herve promised that his father, the multi-billionaire president of the Congo, would purchase tens of millions of dollars in real estate. That victim gave Herve tens of thousands of dollars to assist in the purported father’s real estate tours, such as the rental of bulletproof limousines. The criminal complaint alleges that to lure in the victims and bolster his credibility, Herve showed various documents, such as a letter written to him from a United States Senator, copies of awards of recognition he received from the City and County of San Francisco, and a certificate of Special Congressional Recognition from a Member of Congress. When the victims ran out of money, Herve claimed that he was being deported to Puerto Rico and was not heard from again.

Herve, born in the Republic of Congo, was granted asylum in the United States in 1999 and became a United States citizen earlier this year.

Herve was arrested on a criminal complaint on April 24, 2013, in San Francisco, and he made his initial appearance in federal court in San Francisco the following day. He is currently being held in custody. The defendant’s next scheduled appearance is May 22, 2013, at 11:00 a.m. for further detention proceedings before Magistrate Judge Nathanael Cousins. Herve’s first appearance in district court is scheduled before Judge John Tigar on May 31, 2013 at 9:30 a.m.

The maximum statutory penalty for wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343, is 20 years’ imprisonment and a fine of $250,000. However, any sentence following conviction would be imposed by the court after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.

Hallie Hoffman is the Assistant U.S. Attorney who is prosecuting the case with the assistance of Elizabeth Garcia. The prosecution is the result of an investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the United States Department of Homeland Security.

Please note, an indictment contains only allegations against an individual and, as with all defendants, Herve must be presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
Federal Criminal Defense Attorneys Videos:

Federal Crimes – Be Careful

Federal Crimes – Be Proactive

Federal Crimes – Federal Indictment

Federal Crimes – Detention Hearing

Federal Mail Fraud Crimes

————————————————————–

To find additional federal criminal news, please read Federal Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.


ICE Leads A Federal Investigation and Arrests 9 in an Alleged Drug Trafficking Ring

May 2, 2013

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on May 1, 2013 released the following:

“9 defendants indicted in far-reaching cocaine and meth distribution scheme

LOS ANGELES — A federal investigation into a drug-trafficking organization led by two brothers who oversaw the distribution of cocaine to Italy and across the United States as well as methamphetamine being trafficked across the U.S. – has led to the indictment of nine defendants, three of whom were arrested Wednesday.

Operation “Family Guy” targeted the Urena family drug-trafficking organization through the use of undercover operatives and wiretaps that led to the interception of telephone calls, text messages, and communications sent through BlackBerry Messenger. The probe was conducted by the Los Angeles High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) Task Force, including the Drug Enforcement Administration; U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations; and IRS – Criminal Investigation. The Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department and Whittier Police Department also assisted with the case.

The investigation, which culminated with the issuance of a seven-count grand jury indictment April 24, resulted in the seizure of approximately 40 kilograms of cocaine being smuggled into Italy from the Dominican Republic and Mexico. That cocaine was being transported by female drug couriers allegedly recruited by the two Urena brothers, with assistance from their uncle Francisco Javier Vargas-Oseguera and others. The investigation also uncovered a conspiracy to distribute significant quantities of methamphetamine and cocaine throughout the United States using vehicles with hidden compartments.

The indictment also alleges members of the narcotics-trafficking operation laundered drug proceeds from the Dominican Republic through the use of Western Union wire transfers sent to Fontana and Rancho Cucamonga.

Those named in the indictment unsealed Wednesday are:

  • Milton Urena, 29, of the Dominican Republic, who is currently being sought by authorities;
  • Rafael Urena, 27, of Rancho Cucamonga, Milton Urena’s brother, who was arrested Wednesday;
  • Daniel Alejandro Agredano Vazquez, 22, of the Dominican Republic, who allegedly oversaw the distribution of cocaine from the Dominican Republic to Italy and conspired to launder drug proceeds. He is currently being sought by authorities;
  • Francisco Javier Vargas-Oseguera, 51, an uncle of the Urena brothers, previously of Seattle and recently of Fontana. He is currently in federal custody in Seattle after being charged in federal court there for allegedly possessing eight pounds of methamphetamine in a case unrelated to Operation Family Guy;
  • Leonel Urena-Partida, 49, of Guadalajara, Mexico, another uncle of the Urena brothers, who allegedly conspired to transport cocaine to Italy. He is being sought by authorities;
  • Carmen Garcia, 35, of San Bernardino, allegedly supplied methamphetamine and assisted with the recruitment of drug couriers, who was arrested Wednesday;
  • Eliseo Carrillo Duarte, 45, of Montebello, who is currently in federal custody in Indianapolis after being arrested there in March on unrelated drug-trafficking charges stemming from the seizure of approximately 10 pounds of methamphetamine;
  • Jenna Michelle Martin (also known as Jenna Michelle Smith), 25, of Upland, an alleged drug courier who was arrested Wednesday; and
  • Beth Rene Ford (also known as Beth Rene Florance), 26, formerly of Ontario and now living in the Denver area, a second alleged drug courier, who is expected to self-surrender soon to authorities.

The defendants arrested Wednesday morning are expected to be arraigned Wednesday afternoon in U.S. District Court in downtown Los Angeles.

The indictment specifically charges eight defendants (not Duarte) with conspiracy to distribute cocaine to Italy, which carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years in federal prison and a statutory maximum sentence of life imprisonment. Six of the defendants (not Agredano Vasquez, Martin or Ford) are charged in another conspiracy involving the domestic distribution of cocaine and methamphetamine, a charge that also carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years in federal prison.

Various defendants are also named in a charge that alleges the distribution of approximately one pound of methamphetamine, three counts of use of a communication facility in committing a felony drug offense, and conspiracy to launder money.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
Federal Criminal Defense Attorneys Videos:

Federal Crimes – Be Careful

Federal Crimes – Be Proactive

Federal Crimes – Federal Indictment

Federal Crimes – Detention Hearing

Federal Mail Fraud Crimes

————————————————————–

To find additional federal criminal news, please read Federal Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.


Federal District Court Judge: How Mandatory Minimums Forced Me to Send More Than 1,000 Nonviolent Drug Offenders to Federal Prison

October 26, 2012

The Nation on October 24, 2012 released the following:

Judge Mark W. Bennett

“Reuters/Joshua Lott

Growing up in blue collar Circle Pines, Minnesota, in the 1950s, raised by parents from the “Greatest Generation,” I dreamed only of becoming a civil rights lawyer. My passion for justice was hard-wired into my DNA. Never could I have imagined that by the end of my 50s, after nineteen years as one of 678 federal district court judges in the nation, I would have sent 1,092 of my fellow citizens to federal prison for mandatory minimum sentences ranging from sixty months to life without the possibility of release. The majority of these women, men and young adults are nonviolent drug addicts. Methamphetamine is their drug of choice. Crack cocaine is a distant second. Drug kingpins? Oh yes, I’ve sentenced them, too. But I can count them on one hand. While I’m extremely proud of my father’s service in World War II, I am greatly conflicted about my role in the “war on drugs.”

You might think the Northern District of Iowa—a bucolic area home to just one city with a population above 100,000—is a sleepy place with few federal crimes. You would be wrong. Of the ninety-four district courts across the United States, we have the sixth-heaviest criminal caseload per judge. Here in the heartland, I sentence more drug offenders in a single year than the average federal district court judge in New York City, Washington, Chicago, Minneapolis and San Francisco—combined. While drug cases nationally make up 29 percent of federal judges’ criminal dockets, according to the US Sentencing Commission, they make up more than 56 percent of mine. More startling, while meth cases make up 18 percent of a judge’s drug docket nationally, they account for 78 percent of mine. Add crack cocaine and together they account for 87 percent.

Crack defendants are almost always poor African-Americans. Meth defendants are generally lower-income whites. More than 80 percent of the 4,546 meth defendants sentenced in federal courts in 2010 received a mandatory minimum sentence. These small-time addicts are apprehended not through high-tech wiretaps or sophisticated undercover stings but by common traffic stops for things like nonfunctioning taillights. Or they’re caught in a search of the logs at a local Walmart to see who is buying unusually large amounts of nonprescription cold medicine. They are the low-hanging fruit of the drug war. Other than their crippling meth addiction, they are very much like the folks I grew up with. Virtually all are charged with federal drug trafficking conspiracies—which sounds ominous but is based on something as simple as two people agreeing to purchase pseudoephedrine and cook it into meth. They don’t even have to succeed.

I recently sentenced a group of more than twenty defendants on meth trafficking conspiracy charges. All of them pled guilty. Eighteen were “pill smurfers,” as federal prosecutors put it, meaning their role amounted to regularly buying and delivering cold medicine to meth cookers in exchange for very small, low-grade quantities to feed their severe addictions. Most were unemployed or underemployed. Several were single mothers. They did not sell or directly distribute meth; there were no hoards of cash, guns or countersurveillance equipment. Yet all of them faced mandatory minimum sentences of sixty or 120 months. One meth-addicted mother faced a 240-month sentence because a prior meth conviction in county court doubled her mandatory minimum. She will likely serve all twenty years; in the federal system, there is no parole, and one serves an entire sentence minus a maximum of a 15 percent reduction rewarded for “good time.”

Several years ago, I started visiting inmates I had sentenced in prison. It is deeply inspiring to see the positive changes most have made. Some definitely needed the wake-up call of a prison cell, but very few need more than two or three years behind bars. These men and women need intensive drug treatment, and most of the inmates I visit are working hard to turn their lives around. They are shocked—and glad—to see me, and it’s important to them that people outside prison care about their progress. For far too many, I am their only visitor.

If lengthy mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug addicts actually worked, one might be able to rationalize them. But there is no evidence that they do. I have seen how they leave hundreds of thousands of young children parentless and thousands of aging, infirm and dying parents childless. They destroy families and mightily fuel the cycle of poverty and addiction. In fact, I have been at this so long, I am now sentencing the grown children of people I long ago sent to prison.

For years I have debriefed jurors after their verdicts. Northwest Iowa is one of the most conservative regions in the country, and these are people who, for the most part, think judges are too soft on crime. Yet, for all the times I’ve asked jurors after a drug conviction what they think a fair sentence would be, never has one given a figure even close to the mandatory minimum. It is always far lower. Like people who dislike Congress but like their Congress member, these jurors think the criminal justice system coddles criminals in the abstract—but when confronted by a real live defendant, even a “drug trafficker,” they never find a mandatory minimum sentence to be a just sentence.

Many people across the political spectrum have spoken out against the insanity of mandatory minimums. These include our past three presidents, as well as Supreme Court Justices William Rehnquist, whom nobody could dismiss as “soft on crime,” and Anthony Kennedy, who told the American Bar Association in 2003, “I can accept neither the necessity nor the wisdom of federal mandatory minimum sentences.” In 2005, four former attorneys general, a former FBI director and dozens of former federal prosecutors, judges and Justice Department officials filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court opposing the use of mandatory minimums in a case involving a marijuana defendant facing a fifty-five-year sentence. In 2008, The Christian Science Monitor reported that 60 percent of Americans opposed mandatory minimums for nonviolent offenders. And in a 2010 survey of federal district court judges, 62 percent said mandatory minimums were too harsh.

Federal judges have a longstanding culture of not speaking out on issues of public concern. I am breaking with this tradition not because I am eager to but because the daily grist of what I do compels me to. In 1999, Judge Robert Pratt of the Southern District of Iowa, a courageous jurist whose brilliant opinion in Gall v. United States led to one of the most important Supreme Court sentencing opinions in my professional life, wrote a guest editorial in The Des Moines Register criticizing federal sentencing guidelines and mandatory minimums. He ended by asking, “If we don’t speak up, who will?” I hope more of my colleagues will speak up, regardless of their position on the fairness of mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders. This is an issue of grave national consequence. Might there be a problem when the United States of America incarcerates a higher percentage of its population than any nation in the world?”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
Federal Criminal Defense Attorneys Videos:

Federal Crimes – Be Careful

Federal Crimes – Be Proactive

Federal Crimes – Federal Indictment

Federal Crimes – Detention Hearing

————————————————————–

To find additional federal criminal news, please read Federal Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.


Feds: SC businessman illegally exported to Iran

May 23, 2012

Bloomberg Business Week on May 22, 2012 released the following:

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

“By MEG KINNARD

The president of a North Charleston company has been arrested and charged with illegally exporting goods to Iran and lying to agents about his trade practices, according to federal prosecutors.

Markos Baghdasarian was arrested Saturday at Atlanta’s main airport before he could board a flight to the United Arab Emirates. That’s where, according to federal authorities, Baghdasarian had a business associate who helped get his South Carolina-made products into Iran.

Baghdasarian was president of Delfin Group USA, a Russian-owned producer and supplier of synthetic motor oils that solidified its U.S. presence in the North Charleston area in 2008 with a $55 million renovation to an old Shell Oil plant it had bought for $20 million. Company officials said he was placed on leave May 14 and referred comment on the case to its outside counsel, who did not immediately return a message Tuesday.

Prosecutors said Baghdasarian broke federal law that prohibits trade with Iran without special permission from the federal government. Federal law also requires exporters and shippers to file forms showing where the goods are going.

Some of the evidence that agents say they have amassed against Baghdasarian comes from emails to him from two unidentified business associates, who discussed how to safely get Baghdasarian’s products to Iran without detection. According to prosecutors, one of those unidentified businessmen was Baghdasarian’s agent in Iran and also represented a company in the United Arab Emirates used to ship Delfin products to Iran.

A second unidentified businessman operated another business in the UAE for similar purposes, said John Hardin, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent, in an affidavit.

In July 2010, one of the unidentified businessmen had conversations with another person on how to help Baghdasarian get around U.S. sanctions on Iran by using his UAE-based company. In those communications, according to Hardin, the unidentified businessman said the materials would come into Iran via Dubai but would be relabeled as “UAE product.”

“So u are safe Markos is safe,” the other associated replied, according to Hardin. Other communications discussed what product labels should look like, with one message including a fake address for a California company and a toll-free number that agents determined actually went to offices for Victoria’s Secret.

In August 2011, Delfin USA tried to send aviation engine lubricating oils worth $850,000 to an associate in the UAE, according to Hardin. Federal officials failed in their efforts to contact Baghdasarian’s company to get information about that shipment. Agents attached electronic trackers to another load of 11 containers bound for the UAE; one was traced all the way to Iran.

Earlier this month, Baghdasarian acknowledged to federal agents that one of the unidentified businessmen was a middle man for his company’s products but, according to agents, lied in saying that he didn’t know that the other associate was in Iran until just a few months earlier — after the U.S. Department of Commerce suspended his company’s trading privileges.

Baghdasarian faces up to 20 years in prison if he is convicted. He had an initial hearing in Georgia on Monday, and it wasn’t immediately clear when he would be extradited to South Carolina. A person who answered a number listed for Baghdasarian’s home said she did not know if he had an attorney.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
Federal Criminal Defense Attorneys Videos:

Federal Crimes – Be Careful

Federal Crimes – Be Proactive

Federal Crimes – Federal Indictment

Federal Crimes – Detention Hearing

————————————————————–

To find additional federal criminal news, please read Federal Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.


Uncle Sam fabricates crimes due to political agenda – Bout

May 14, 2012

RT.com on May 13, 2012 released the following:

“Convicted arms trafficker Victor Bout told RT in an exclusive interview his case is purely political. Bout says his false conviction exposes America’s justice system as one of a police state on the brink of dictatorship.

Bout, who continues to maintain his innocence, is serving 25 years for conspiring to kill US citizens and sell arms to Colombian militants.

This week, it was decided that Bout will be sent from a New York prison to a super-maximum security prison, despite his trial judge recommending medium-security confinement.

The Colorado prison is known as the ‘Alcatraz of the Rockies’, and houses America’s most-dangerous and violent criminals. Bout’s lawyer is fighting to overturn the decision.

RT: You are sentenced to a quarter of a century behind bars. What does it feel like?

Viktor Bout: They can put physically your body in jail but they cannot jail your spirit. If your spirit is free and you understand what freedom is – it is impossible to break you down to your knees. I know I did not commit anything to get that punishment. Whatever they allege me as crimes – these crimes would never exist, unless the US government would invent that crime.

They labeled that conspiracy with “kill Americans” which works like a magic bullet for the jury here. The trial was very similar to medieval witch-hunt trials of inquisition when you must confess that you did bad things.

I understand the reality. I try to bring the message to my friends and my family, to the Russian people: listen, what is happening to me is a pure political case.

RT: You’re in a process of appeal and you’ve also asked Russia’s State Duma to file a complaint against the US and Thailand. What are you hoping for legally and politically?

VB: Legally the lawyers would know better the precedent of American law and what my perspectives are and what they are going to do. But I have almost no hope because this system works so that once you’re put under judicial decisions – no judge, even the Supreme Court, would ever cancel that. Because this is a “truth in Über state”. Nobody can ever reconsider that decision. [In the US] it is accepted that juries cannot fail.

RT: We know you’re about to be transferred to prison in Colorado. Considering your family and lawyer are in New York, will this affect you a lot, this transfer?

VB: They are trying to put me in the most notorious underground jail in the mountains hidden underground so I could never see daylight again as a punishment. For them this is a chance to create more obstacles to a proper appeal.

RT: You said in court to the jury and DEA agents: “God knows the truth, you know the truth.” What is your message to the US officials today, maybe the US president?

VB: I have a message to the US president: “If you keep using those thugs named DEA agents who invent crimes, this would not help America to really solve the problem of drug wars. But instead of going to the real problem they would just create crimes because there is no danger for them to go to those who do not hide, provoke them, do their dirty tricks and frame people up instead of solving real problems with real drug traffickers.

RT: It has been reported you knew you were dealing with undercover agents, not FARC members, at the time of your arrest. Is this the case?

VB: I was not sure who they are. For me they were very strange people and by their posing I understood right away they have nothing to do with FARC at all.

RT: You were dubbed the ‘Merchant of Death’ – do you think this nickname affected your case more than it should have?

VB: Of course. This is what the entire story is about. First you create a myth, then you bring in people who already saw the movie… My company was doing transportation, but that was legitimate contracts with legitimate governments with all the formalities done properly.

RT: Why do you think they went after you?

VB: For them it does not matter whom they are going to pick up. The mass media is spoon-feeding the American population so they do not care whom they pick up.

RT: You’ve seen the movie about yourself with Nicolas Cage playing you. What do you think about his performance?

VB: I feel sorry for him because it is a very mediocre movie. I do not even think it is interesting to watch or that it is a fair representation of the problems of Africa.

RT: If you knew you’d be serving 25 years behind bars, would you act differently?

VB: I do not regret nothing in my life and I can face anything I did because I didn’t do anything wrong in my life.

RT: If you were a free man right now, do you know what you would be doing? Would you start something new?

VB: Of course. I’m already locked-up for four years behind bars by Uncle Sam. My life is ruined completely. I don’t have any money left at all. They have not only closed my company, but put executive orders claiming $3 billion from me.

I’m asking a challenging president of the US: show the proof that I ever owned those billions! At least I know where to get money for my defense team.

If you repeat something a thousand times – it becomes the truth. This is the recipe used by the US administration, just like they did with weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

RT: Critics of your case have been saying it is anti-Russian. Is it the case?

VB: Of course it is anti-Russian. Look at what happened in Thailand during the extradition procedure. The criminal court of Bangkok denied the extradition. They applied tremendous pressure on the government of Thailand and actually bought me out, not extradited. We submitted an appeal to the Thai court and it is still not finished. The pressure was so huge they had to pass me to the American side. My case is still on the shelves in Thailand.

If there is a political will of the Thai government and they want to prove they have real, not mock, justice, and that they are not a colony of the US – they have to do a decision on my case.

RT: Will there be more ‘manufactured crimes’ when foreigners are brought unlawfully to American soil?

VB: The FBI and the DEA are manufacturing crimes regularly. I closely monitor such cases… This is how they fight their war on terror, because terror is not a state or a person.

RT: You said you’ll be able to return home earlier than your term is over. How is that?

VB: My case is purely political. Despite the American procedures the Russian public knows the truth.

My case shows the real condition of the American justice system of a police state close to dictatorship.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
Federal Criminal Defense Attorneys Videos:

Federal Crimes – Be Careful

Federal Crimes – Be Proactive

Federal Crimes – Federal Indictment

Federal Crimes – Detention Hearing

Federal Mail Fraud Crimes

Federal Crimes – Appeal

————————————————————–

To find additional federal criminal news, please read Federal Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.


Drug crime sends first-time offender grandmom to prison for life

May 10, 2012

Houston Chronicle on May 10, 2012 released the following:

“Houstonian, who has no secrets to trade, is doing more time than drug lords
By Dane Schiller

FORT WORTH – The U.S. government didn’t offer a reward for the capture of Houston grandmother Elisa Castillo, nor did it accuse her of touching drugs, ordering killings, or getting rich off crime.

But three years after a jury convicted her in a conspiracy to smuggle at least a ton of cocaine on tour buses from Mexico to Houston, the 56-year-old first-time offender is locked up for life – without parole.

“It is ridiculous,” said Castillo, who is a generation older than her cell mates, and is known as “grandma” at the prison here. “I am no one.”

Convicted of being a manager in the conspiracy, she is serving a longer sentence than some of the hemisphere’s most notorious crime bosses – men who had multimillion-dollar prices on their heads before their capture.

The drug capos had something to trade: the secrets of criminal organizations. The biggest drug lords have pleaded guilty in exchange for more lenient sentences.

Castillo said she has nothing to offer in a system rife with inconsistencies and behind-the-scenes scrambling that amounts to a judicial game of Let’s Make A Deal.

“Our criminal justice system is broke; it needs to be completely revamped,” declared Terry Nelson, who was a federal agent for over 30 years and is on the executive board of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. “They have the power, and if you don’t play the game, they’ll throw the book at you.”

Castillo maintains her innocence, saying she was tricked into unknowingly helping transport drugs and money for a big trafficker in Mexico. But she refused to plead guilty and went to trial.

In 2010, of 1,766 defendants prosecuted for federal drug offenses in the Southern District of Texas – a region that reaches from Houston to the border – 93.2 percent pleaded guilty rather than face trial, according to the U.S. government. Just 10 defendants were acquitted at trial, and 82 saw their cases dismissed.

The statistics are similar nationwide.

The latest case in point came this week with the negotiated surrender of a Colombian drug boss Javier Calle Serna, whom the United States accuses of shipping at least 30 tons of cocaine.

While how much time Calle will face is not known publicly, he likely studied other former players, including former Gulf Cartel lord Osiel Cardenas Guillen.

Cardenas once led one of Mexico’s most powerful syndicates and created the Zetas gang. He pleaded guilty in Houston and is to be released by 2025. He’ll be 57.

As the federal prison system has no parole, Castillo has no prospect of ever going home.

“Any reasonable person would look at this and say, ‘God, are you kidding?’ ” said attorney David Bires, who represented Castillo on an unsuccessful appeal. “It is not right.”

Castillo’s elderly mother in Mexico has not been told she’s serving life, and her toddler grandson thinks she’s in the hospital when he comes to visit her in prison.

Castillo is adamant about her innocence.

“Put yourself in my shoes. When you are innocent, you are innocent,” she said. “I don’t say I am perfect. I am not … but I can guarantee you 100 percent that I am innocent of this.”

At the urging of her boyfriend, Martin Ovalle, Castillo became partners with a smooth-talking Mexican resident who said he wanted to set up a Houston-based bus company.

But the buses were light on passengers and shuttled thousands of pounds of cocaine into the United States and millions of dollars back to Mexico. Her lawyers argued she was naive.

Castillo claims she didn’t know about the drug operation, but agents said she should have known something was wrong when quantities of money and drugs were repeatedly found on the coaches.

“After hearing all the evidence as presented from both the government and defense in this case, the jury found her guilty … ,” said Kenneth Magidson, chief prosecutor here.

Former federal prosecutor Mark W. White III said if Castillo had something to share, she might have benefited from a sentence reduction for cooperating.

“Information is a cooperating defendant’s stock in trade,” White said, “and if you don’t have any, … the chances are you won’t get a good deal.”

Castillo has faith that she’ll somehow, some day, go free. Her daily routine doesn’t vary: when she eats breakfast, when she works, when she exercises, and when she brushes her hair, which has gone from red-blond to black and gray. The gray gets respect in prison.

“I will leave here one day with my head held high,” she said. “I don’t feel like a bug or a cockroach. I am a human being, with my feet firmly on the ground.”"

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
Federal Criminal Defense Attorneys Videos:

Federal Crimes – Be Careful

Federal Crimes – Be Proactive

Federal Crimes – Federal Indictment

————————————————————–

To find additional federal criminal news, please read Federal Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.


Federal Grand Jury Returns Multiple Indictments in Tyler

May 4, 2012

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on May 3, 2012 released the following:

“TYLER, TX— A federal grand jury returned multiple indictments on May 2, 2012, charging individuals with separate federal crimes in the Eastern District of Texas, announced U.S. Attorney John M. Bales.

David Anthony, 51, of Texarkana, Arkansas, was indicted on charges of theft of government property. If convicted, he faces up to 10 years in federal prison. According to the indictment, on March 18, 2012, Anthony is alleged to have stolen brass, which belonged to the Department of the Army, from the Red River Army Depot. The resulting loss to the government was more than $1,000. This case is being investigated by the Red River Army Depot and prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Denise O. Simpson.

Thomas Rochelle, III, 34, of Texarkana, Texas, was indicted on charges of theft of personal property within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction. If convicted, he faces up to one year in federal prison. According to the indictment, on Mar. 19, 2012, Rochelle is alleged to have stolen an iPhone which belonged to another person while he was in the jurisdiction of the United States at the Red River Army Depot. This case is being investigated by the Red River Army Depot and prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Denise O. Simpson.

Santos Silva-Hernandez, 43, an inmate at the Texarkana Federal Correctional Institution, was charged with possession of contraband in a prison. If convicted, he faces up to five years in federal prison. According to the indictment, on Nov. 26, 2011, Silva-Hernandez is alleged to have been in possession of marijuana while incarcerated in a federal correctional facility. This case is being investigated by the FBI and the Texarkana FCI and prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Denise O. Simpson.

A grand jury indictment is not evidence of guilt. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
Federal Criminal Defense Attorneys Videos:

Federal Crimes – Be Careful

Federal Crimes – Be Proactive

Federal Crimes – Federal Indictment

Federal Crimes – Detention Hearing

————————————————————–

To find additional federal criminal news, please read Federal Criminal Defense Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition Defense, OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal, International Criminal Court Defense, and US Seizure of Non-Resident, Foreign-Owned Assets. Because we have experience dealing with INTERPOL, our firm understands the inter-relationship that INTERPOL’s “Red Notice” brings to this equation.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.


Federal anti-hacking prosecutions reined in by appeals court ruling

April 11, 2012

MercuryNews.com on April 10, 2012 released the following:

“By Howard Mintz

Warning that merely looking up sports scores or online dating services at work could lead to a prison cell, a federal appeals court on Tuesday reined in the federal government’s power to prosecute employees who stray from their bosses’ rules on using company computers.

In a case against a Danville man, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found the Justice Department had gone too far in enforcing a nearly 30-year-old computer hacking law, expressing concern that on-the-job “minor dalliances” with Facebook and Google “would become federal crimes.”

The 9th Circuit, in its 9-to-2 ruling, limited the scope of the 1984 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, saying it cannot be used to prosecute someone simply for the unauthorized use of information on their workplace computers. The decision sets up a possible showdown in the U.S. Supreme Court because federal courts around the country have ruled otherwise.

The case has been closely watched by digital civil liberties groups, which have warned that prosecutors can bring criminal charges for violating routine corporate rules on the use of work computers. Redwood City-based Oracle, however, sided with the government in the appeal, saying in court papers that the anti-hacking law may be needed to punish employees who steal inside information.

But the court majority clearly was concerned that a heavy hand could slap cuffs on minor offenders.

“Minds have wandered since the beginning of time and the computer gives employees new ways to procrastinate, by g-chatting with friends, playing games, shopping or watching sports highlights,” Chief Judge Alex Kozinski wrote. “Basing criminal liability on violations of private computer use policies can transform whole categories of otherwise innocuous behavior into federal crimes simply because a computer is involved.”

The case centered on the prosecution of David Nosal, an executive at Korn/Ferry International, a San Francisco corporate recruiting firm. Federal prosecutors alleged that Nosal and co-workers illegally foraged in the company’s database for information to establish a rival company and charged him with trade secrets theft and violations of the anti-hacking law.

Even with the 9th Circuit ruling, several charges remain against Nosal, including the trade secrets allegations. But the charges of unauthorized use of a computer under the anti-hacking law became the focus of the 9th Circuit legal showdown.

Nosal’s lawyers, backed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, argued that employees should not face criminal prosecution under anti-hacking statutes when they have a right to use their company computers, but violate corporate policy on the type of information accessed on those computers. They insisted such a broad reading of the law could expose employees to criminal investigations for routine violations of corporate policies.

Orin Kerr, a George Washington University law professor and expert on the statute, said the 9th Circuit got it right.

“What Kozinski is saying is that under the government’s view, most people are criminals,” Kerr said. “It’s an important victory for Internet rights. It limits the power of the government to prosecute people for innocent activity.”

The Justice Department declined to comment. But government lawyers argued in the appeal that Nosal was prosecuted only because he was accused of using his workplace computer to steal his employer’s secrets. They denied a wider threat of prosecuting people for surfing the Web at work.

Two 9th Circuit judges agreed, dissenting from the ruling.

“This case has nothing to do with playing sudoku, checking email, fibbing on dating sites or any of the other activities the majority rightly values,” Judge Barry Silverman wrote Tuesday.

“It has everything to do with stealing an employer’s valuable information to set up a competing business with the purloined data, siphoned away from the victim, knowing such access and use were prohibited.”"

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
Federal Criminal Defense Attorneys Videos:

Federal Crimes – Be Careful

Federal Crimes – Be Proactive

Federal Crimes – Federal Indictment

Federal Crimes – Appeal

————————————————————–

To find additional federal criminal news, please read Federal Crimes Watch Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.


Federal authorities watching investigations of Milwaukee police

April 4, 2012

Journal Sentinel on April 4, 2012 released the following:

“By Gina Barton of the Journal Sentinel

Allegations that seven Milwaukee police officers and a sergeant may have sexually assaulted people and violated their civil rights while conducting body cavity searches on the street have led to the most sweeping investigation of the Police Department in at least a decade.

Milwaukee County prosecutors have launched a John Doe investigation, an inquiry in which prosecutors can compel testimony and subpoena documents without public knowledge. Simultaneously, the civilian Fire and Police Commission and the department’s internal affairs division are reviewing numerous complaints dating back a couple of years.

The FBI and the U.S. attorney’s office are closely monitoring the local investigation. If federal authorities are not satisfied with the outcome, they could launch an investigation of their own, as they did after the 2004 beating of Frank Jude Jr. by a group of off-duty offi cers.

In the Jude case, three officers were acquitted in state court. Ultimately, those three and four others were convicted in federal court.

And that’s not the only federal prosecution in recent years.

In total, at least 13 former Milwaukee police officers have been convicted of federal crimes since 2005.

But filing criminal charges isn’t the only way the federal government can get involved in fighting police corruption.

If federal authorities discover a pattern of civil rights abuses, a 1994 law gives them the authority to sanction an entire police department. Under the Obama administration, officials in Washington, D.C., have stepped up those prosecutions, known as “pattern or practice” investigations, experts say.

Federal authorities look for trends that show departments are tolerant of illegal or abusive behavior by officers, said David Harris, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law who specializes in police accountability issues.

“The argument that there are a few bad apples, I don’t buy that,” he said. “The fact that they are allowed to exist and thrive in the open for years and years means you have a dysfunctional organization.”

Racial profiling; searches and seizures without probable cause; the targeting of minority populations for harassment; a poor citizen complaint process; excessive use of force; or excessive use of weapons or Tasers all could warrant federal intervention, Harris said.

The complaints about potentially illegal searches in Milwaukee’s District 5 that came to light two weeks ago follow two Journal Sentinel investigations that raise questions about the department’s procedures: One in December found wide racial disparities in traffic stops and searches; and one in October showed how 93 officers kept their jobs despite run-ins with the law.

“In any large organization, you are going to have some bad people,” Harris said. “But when those bad people are not rooted out, when discipline is uneven, when there is no sense that there is justice, when the department investigates itself, you undermine public confidence – even if crime is down.”

Pattern or practice investigations usually are triggered when the American Civil Liberties Union or another civil rights group files a complaint with the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C., according to Scott Greenwood, a constitutional and police civil rights attorney who also serves as national counsel for the ACLU.

Locally, the ACLU of Wisconsin is conducting its own research into both the invasive searches and the traffic stops, according to Chris Ahmuty, executive director. If the department and the Fire and Police Commission are not cooperative, filing a federal complaint could be the next step, he said.

“There’s not a contradiction between civil liberties and professional police service,” Ahmuty said. “This idea that the officers’ motives, if they are pure, that somehow ameliorates the harm, that doesn’t wash. You could see that could sort of infect the whole culture of the Police Department.”

Michael G. Tobin, executive director of the Fire and Police Commission, said it would be premature to conclude that a pattern of misconduct has occurred, he said in a statement.

“The fact that people have come forward indicates to me that there is confidence in the system that we have for handling these matters,” Tobin said. “Sometimes we lose track of the fact that we have made so many positive changes that have increased the public trust over the past five years or so. We have to keep earning that trust on a daily basis in everything we do, from the beat cop talking respectfully with everyone they meet, to the way we handle this investigation.”

Milwaukee Police Chief Edward Flynn was unavailable to comment.

Since 1997, the Justice Department has investigated more than two dozen police agencies – including those in New Orleans, Seattle and Maricopa County, Ariz., where the sheriff made illegal immigration his top priority – for potential pattern or practice violations, according to the DOJ’s website.

Pattern or practice investigations, conducted by the special-litigation section of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, generally last several months and involve interviews with potential victims and a review of department records.

When it comes to department policies and procedures, Justice Department investigators are interested not only in whether good ones exist, but also whether they are followed, Harris said.

“If they have the systems but don’t use them, that could be just as bad a problem,” he said. “It could be your systems are just window dressing and you do things the way you have always done them.”

The investigations almost always result in a memorandum of understanding or a consent decree, both of which are agreements among the Justice Department, municipal and police officials and community members to work together for change, according to Harris and Greenwood. The key difference is that a consent decree is enforced by a federal judge.

While most agreements include monitoring of the police department and regular reporting of progress, other requirements vary.

In New Orleans, a consent decree is still being hammered out. In the meantime, FBI agents have taken up residence inside the internal affairs division, which, like Milwaukee’s, investigates its own officers when they are accused of wrongdoing.

In Seattle, the city and the Justice Department each have developed improvement plans and are working on an agreement to fix problems. The Justice Department has urged the Police Department “to collect and analyze data that could address and respond to the perception that some of its officers engage in discriminatory policing,” according to a letter federal officials wrote to the city’s mayor at the end of their investigation.

The Maricopa County, Ariz., sheriff’s office must improve its training, data collection, complaint system and communication with non-English speakers, according to a letter to the county attorney presenting the Justice Department’s findings. Whether any or all of those reforms end up in an agreement remains to be seen.

It may take years for a pattern or practice investigation to yield tangible results, according to Harris.

“What this is supposed to result in is a transformed police department with state-of-the-art practices and all the rules for up-to-date police interaction with civilians,” he said.

The police chief must take the lead in changing the department’s culture, according to Greenwood.

That’s what happened in Cincinnati 10 years ago, said Greenwood, who served as lead counsel in the case there. The Department of Justice came in after 15 African-American men, some of them unarmed, died at the hands of police, according to Tom Streicher, Cincinnati police chief at the time. It resulted in riots, he said.

Although he initially resisted change, the Justice Department’s involvement helped him realize the department needed to be more transparent, Streicher said.

“Anybody who thinks they can do it alone is a fool,” he said. “No entity can do it all by itself because a police agency isn’t meant to serve itself any more than the government is meant to serve itself. You have to engage the public and you have to keep them engaged and you have to be accountable to the public because they give you the power and authority to police them. If you don’t have accountability, history has shown us you are destined to revisit what occurred before.”

At that time, the Cincinnati Police Department refused to release information about pending investigations, a policy that still exists within the Milwaukee Police Department and many others around the country. The Cincinnati Police Department’s agreement with the Justice Department changed all that.

“The agreement required us to share anything and everything we do with anyone who wanted to know about it,” Streicher said. “There was no more, ‘We can’t discuss this because it’s under investigation.’ “

Within eight hours of an incident, the investigating officer was required to produce a PowerPoint presentation that could be shared with the public, Streicher said. Documents such as incident reports were given to the media before investigations were complete. When police officers were accused of wrongdoing, the department released their names and the allegations against them immediately.

“That evokes a lot of confidence in people,” Streicher said. “That’s what the Justice Department can do: Making policing better. Making police more responsible and accountable for their actions, as well as providing guidelines to improve the overall agency.”

Federal oversight in Milwaukee would go a long way toward changing a number of questionable customs, policies and procedures in the Police Department here, according to attorney Jonathan Safran, who represented Jude.

“We believe that better policies and procedures, utilizing outside agencies, and maybe having an independent monitor involved to review the investigations and outcomes, would restore citizens’ respect for, and cooperation with the City of Milwaukee Police Department,” he said in a statement.”

————————————————————–

Douglas McNabb – McNabb Associates, P.C.’s
Federal Criminal Defense Attorneys Videos:

Federal Crimes – Be Careful

Federal Crimes – Be Proactive

Federal Crimes – Federal Indictment

————————————————————–

To find additional federal criminal news, please read Federal Crimes Watch Daily.

Douglas McNabb and other members of the U.S. law firm practice and write and/or report extensively on matters involving Federal Criminal Defense, INTERPOL Red Notice Removal, International Extradition and OFAC SDN Sanctions Removal.

The author of this blog is Douglas C. McNabb. Please feel free to contact him directly at mcnabb@mcnabbassociates.com or at one of the offices listed above.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 9,687 other followers