“Federal prosecutor to announce dozens of violent crime arrests Friday”

May 10, 2013

The Kansas City Star on May 10, 2013 released the following:

“BY MARK MORRIS
The Kansas City Star

A 10-month Kansas City undercover investigation culminated this week in the arrests of dozens of criminal suspects in one of the largest violent crime sweeps in western Missouri history, authorities said.

U.S. Attorney Tammy Dickinson is expected to announce today the indictment of 61 people, most already convicted felons, on a host of weapon and drug charges. State authorities are considering whether to prosecute in state court up to a dozen more cases generated by the federal operation, officials said.

The investigation, which involved up to 50 officers and agents each day, began in late June and focused exclusively on “violent individuals using firearms,” said Marino F. Vidoli, special agent in charge of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ Kansas City office.

“We know who the violent individuals are in this community,” Vidoli said in a recent interview. “We know their backgrounds and it helps us target our law enforcement resources.”

Federal grand juries recently returned the indictments under seal. About 150 Kansas City police officers, federal agents and deputy U.S. marshals began making the arrests Tuesday.

Dickinson said the arrests and prosecutions are closely linked to work of the Kansas City No Violence Alliance, known as KC NoVa, that is designed to reduce shootings and killings in the city.

The NoVa effort has begun to identify individuals and groups most likely to commit violent crimes. Authorities offer social services, such as substance abuse treatment or job training, and promise swift prosecution if they do not leave the criminal life.

“This is shock and awe,” Dickinson said. “We’re sending a signal to the NoVa network that we’re going to come get you if you turn your back on us.”

As of late Thursday, authorities had arrested 28 people. Nineteer others already were in state or federal custody. Agents and officers continued to search for 14 fugitives, officials said.

Investigators recovered 222 firearms during the investigation, Vidoli said, including handguns, sawed-off shotguns, long guns and assault rifles. Some had been stolen; others had been defaced by having serial numbers filed off, he said.

And, after investigators ran ballistics evidence from the guns through an ATF database, they linked some of the weapons to other violent crimes, including homicides, Dickinson said.

Law enforcement records obtained by The Kansas City Star during the investigation showed that agents and police set up an undercover base in a high-crime area where they purchased drugs and guns.

The undercover location was equipped for audio and video recording, according to the records.

Throughout the summer, fall and winter, suspects offered to sell the undercover officers firearms, some of which turned out to have been stolen, court records said. About two-thirds of the sellers already had been convicted of felony crimes, investigators learned.

About half still were on probation or parole.

Others allegedly violated lesser known weapons charges, such as being illegal drug users or illegal aliens in possession of firearms.

One defendant purportedly possessed a .380-caliber pistol while facing a Jackson County burglary charge.

The investigation’s most serious charges have been laid against six men arrested as part of an ATF operation aimed at stopping deadly home invasions.

According to ATF records obtained by The Star during the investigation, the suspects agreed to participate in a robbery of a drug stash house and met several times with undercover agents to plan the heist.

An undercover ATF agent said recently that no stash house actually existed.

All six suspects face drug and robbery conspiracy charges and a firearms count, and could receive maximum life sentences if convicted.

The extensive planning behind the investigation extended to preparations for this week’s arrests and prosecutions. Just after taking office in January, Dickinson warned that prosecutors in units other than the Violent Crimes Strike Force should count on helping out with an expected influx of gun cases.

Judges, pretrial officers and even detention centers were warned about a surge of new defendants.

Court records show that at least three separate grand juries, meeting in April and early May, began churning out secret indictments, which remained under seal until this week.

Starting Tuesday morning, those arrested were herded through magistrate courtrooms in the federal courthouse for first appearances before judges. Prosecutors asked that about 95 percent of the new defendants be jailed without bond pending trial, Dickinson said.

“That has taken a huge amount of coordination with the courts, with the marshals and with federal probation and parole,” Dickinson said. “We were pleased with the cooperation and were welcomed with open arms.”

Following the news conference today, Dickinson and Vidoli plan to join Kansas City Police Chief Darryl Forte and Jackson County Prosecutor Jean Peters Baker for individual meetings with targets of the NoVa initiative who did not appear at an April meeting to hear an offer of social services.

Organizers had invited 120 people to the meeting, but only about three dozen appeared.

“We’re going out to speak to individuals and let them know they’re on our radar screens,” Dickinson said. “This (investigation) helps drive home the point.””

————————————————————–

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.


Three Charged with Allegedly Making Threats Against University of Pittsburgh

August 16, 2012

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on August 15, 2012 released the following:

“PITTSBURGH— A federal grand jury in the Western District of Pennsylvania today returned two indictments charging a resident of Dublin, Ireland, with a series of crimes related to e-mailed threats targeting the University of Pittsburgh, three federal courthouses, and a federal officer. A third indictment charges two Ohio men for additional online threats against the university, announced U.S. Attorney David J. Hickton.

A 35-count indictment named Adam Stuart Busby, 64, of Dublin, as the sole defendant. According to the indictment, from March 30, 2012 until April 21, 2012, Busby sent more than 40 e-mails targeting the University of Pittsburgh campus. The e-mailed bomb threats resulted in more than 100 evacuations at the University of Pittsburgh, greatly disrupting the university community. The indictment charges Busby with 17 counts of wire fraud, 16 counts of maliciously conveying false information in the form of bomb threats, and two counts of international extortion.

A separate but related four-count indictment alleges that on June 20 and 21, 2012, Busby maliciously conveyed false information through the Internet claiming bombs had been placed at U.S. courthouses located in Pittsburgh, Erie, and Johnstown, Pennsylvania. In addition, Busby is charged with threatening David J. Hickton, a federal officer, while he was engaged in the performance of his official duties.

A one-count indictment named Alexander Waterland, 24, of Loveland, Ohio; and Brett Hudson, 26, of Hillsboro, Ohio, as defendants. According to the indictment, between April 25, 2012 and May 23, 2012, Waterland and Hudson engaged in a conspiracy targeting the University of Pittsburgh with interstate threats claiming they were associates of the computer hacking group Anonymous. The threats—posted on YouTube by a user calling himself “AnonOperative13,” sent via e-mail, and publicized via Twitter—attempted to extort the chancellor of the university into placing an apology on the university’s website. The threats claimed that if the chancellor did not comply with their demands, confidential information stored on the computer servers of the University of Pittsburgh would be released.

The maximum penalty for wire fraud is 20 years in prison. The maximum penalty for maliciously conveying false information is 10 years in prison. The maximum penalty for extortionate threats is two years in prison. Because all counts charged are felonies, the maximum fine on each count is $250,000. The law provides for a maximum sentence of five years in prison, a fine of $250,000, or both for Waterland and Hudson. Under the federal sentencing guidelines, the actual sentence imposed would be based upon the seriousness of the offenses and the prior criminal history, if any, of the defendants.

Assistant U.S. Attorney James T. Kitchen is prosecuting these cases on behalf of the government.

The FBI, the Western Pennsylvania Joint Terrorism Task Force, and the University of Pittsburgh Police Department conducted the investigation leading to the indictment in these cases.

An indictment is an accusation. A defendant is 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.


Bulger plans to take the stand

August 7, 2012

The Boston Globe on August 7, 2012 released the following:

“He would detail an immunity deal

By Milton J. Valencia
Globe Staff

James “Whitey” Bulger, once America’s most wanted criminal, will for the first time ­address the charges against him, taking the stand in his own defense in hope of convincing a jury that federal officials once granted him immunity for his many crimes, his lawyer said Monday.

J.W. Carney Jr. announced that plan during a hearing in US District Court in Boston. He said Bulger wants to provide a firsthand account of his relationship with the FBI and the deal he had for working secretly as a government informant.

“He is going to tell the truth, if the judge permits him to,” Carney later told reporters outside the federal courthouse.

Bulger’s testimony could further shed light on one of the darkest eras of the FBI, as the gangster would probably describe the crimes he committed, what the FBI knew of them, and whether he received promises for his cooperation, providing a firsthand, real-life account of the type of underworld events that have become the fodder of books and movies.

Carney said that Bulger, a ­fugitive for more than 16 years until his arrest in June 2011, wants to tell his story directly to jurors at his trial, scheduled for March, rather than bring it ­before US District Court Judge Richard Stearns, who is presiding over the case.

Bulger’s lead attorney has questioned whether Stearns, who was head of the criminal division in the US attorney’s ­office in Boston during part of the time Bulger allegedly committed his crimes, would be able to look at the immunity claim impartially.

“Our client believes that he will get fairer consideration on the issue of immunity from a jury than he will from the person who was the head of the criminal bureau of the United States attorney’s office,” Carney said, adding, “I expect that he will get a fair jury and trust that they will see the truth.”

Bulger, a notorious gangster in Boston, had been secretly working as an FBI informant while allegedly carrying out his crimes. He fled shortly before a federal indictment of him came down in January 1995, after ­being tipped off by his corrupt FBI handler, John Connolly, who is now in prison for his role in a murder linked to Bulger.

Later, hearings in US District Court in Boston exposed Bulger’s inappropriate relationship with the FBI, and he was eventually charged with participating in 19 murders. He was discovered and arrested in ­Santa Monica, Calif. in a rent-controlled apartment he had been sharing with his girlfriend, Catherine Greig, since 1996.

Family members of some of Bulger’s alleged victims said outside the courthouse Monday that Carney is getting desperate in his representation of the ­notorious gangster, and they questioned how Bulger could believe he had a “license to kill.”

But they also said they look forward to his testimony.

“I want to hear what he has to say,” said Patricia Donahue, whose husband, Michael, was an innocent bystander allegedly gunned down by Bulger in 1982 while giving a friend a ride home.

Whether Bulger will be able to raise an immunity defense before jurors remains an open question, according to legal ­analysts. The courts have established, in the case of Bulger’s longtime cohort, Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi, that a ­defendant cannot claim immunity offered by a rogue FBI agent.

US District Court Judge Mark L. Wolf made that ruling, which was upheld by the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, when Flemmi said he and Bulger were granted ­immunity for passing along information incriminating the Mafia.

But Carney has said that Bulger’s deal was different: The 82-year-old gangster asserts the immunity was granted not by the FBI, but from within the US Department of Justice, which has the authority to make ­immunity agreements.

Carney would not identify the law enforcement official he said granted Bulger’s immunity, saying he will do that at trial. But he has indicated in court ­records that he plans to call as witnesses some of the former law enforcement officials who held leadership positions in the US attorney’s office, such as Stearns and William F. Weld, former governor, who was also a US attorney during a part of the time Bulger allegedly committed his crimes.

Carney also said he would introduce evidence that would impeach the credibility of past statements by former and ­deceased law enforcement officials, such as former US attorney Jeremiah O’Sullivan.

O’Sullivan was the US attorney who decided against indicting Bulger and Flemmi in a historic horse race-fixing scheme, though about 20 other gangsters, including associates in their Winter Hill gang, were charged and received lengthy prison sentences.

A.J. Manieri, a Providence-based criminal defense lawyer who has followed the Bulger case and others in organized crime, said the assertion of ­immunity seems to be a question of law that Stearns might have to decide before it reaches jurors. Prosecutors will probably argue that Bulger had no deal of immunity for crimes such as murder, and jurors should not be exposed to the assertion. Manieri said that the judge could exclude testimony that would not be relevant to the charges.

But he also said that Carney will want to show that the agreement came not from a rogue FBI agent, but from within the leadership of the Department of Justice. He said Carney could be successful just in having Stearns take up the legal ­issue because it would settle the question of law. “It’s going to be a bloodbath in there,” he said.”

————————————————————–

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.


Attorney Among Four Defendants Indicted in Alleged $16.2 Million Mortgage Fraud Scheme Involving at Least 35 Residential Loans

June 5, 2012

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on June 4, 2012 released the following:

“CHICAGO— Four defendants—an attorney, a loan originator, a mortgage broker, and a loan processor—were indicted for allegedly participating in a scheme to fraudulently obtain at least 35 mortgage loans totaling more than $16.2 million from various lenders, federal law enforcement officials announced today. The indictment alleges that the mortgages were obtained to finance the purchase of properties throughout Chicago and in suburban Country Club Hills by buyers who were fraudulently qualified for loans, while the defendants allegedly profited from fees they were paid and undisclosed payments they obtained.

All four defendants were charged with various counts of mail fraud and bank fraud in a nine-count indictment that was returned by a federal grand jury last Thursday. The indictment also seeks forfeiture of $16,218,050. The charges were announced today by Patrick J. Fitzgerald, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois; Robert D. Grant, Special Agent in Charge of the Chicago Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; and Thomas P. Brady, Inspector in Charge of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service in Chicago.

Hakeem Rashid—39, of Miami and formerly of the Chicago area, a licensed loan originator who was employed by two mortgage brokerage companies, including 1st Regent Mortgage Funding Inc.—was charged with four counts of mail fraud and five counts of bank fraud. Kareem Broughton, 39, of Chicago, a mortgage broker and the owner of 1st Regent, was charged with two counts of mail fraud and three counts of bank fraud. Marguerite Elise Dixon-Roper, also known as “Elise Dixon,” 46, of Darien, an attorney, was charged with one count of mail fraud and two counts of bank fraud; and Jada Elaine Lucas, aka “Sophia Youssef,” 52, of Chicago, a loan processor at 1st Regent and another brokerage, was charged with three counts of mail fraud and one count of bank fraud.

An arrest warrant was issued for Rashid. The other three defendants are scheduled to be arraigned at 9:30 a.m. Thursday before Magistrate Judge Geraldine Soat Brown in U.S. District Court.

Between 2005 and May 2008, all four defendants and others allegedly schemed to obtain the fraudulent mortgages by making false representations in loan applications, supporting documents, and HUD-1 settlement statements concerning the buyers’ income, employment, financial condition, source of down payments, and intention to occupy the property.

As part of the scheme, Rashid, Broughton, and Dixon-Roper allegedly recruited buyers to purchase properties and facilitated the buyers’ purchase of properties, knowing that they would be fraudulently qualified for mortgage loans. Rashid and Broughton allegedly paid buyers for purchasing properties, while concealing the payments from lenders. In addition, the defendants also allegedly either purchased properties, which were mostly scattered throughout the city, and/or refinanced existing mortgages in their own names, knowing that they were fraudulently qualified for the loans.

According to the indictment, Broughton received payment through 1st Regent in the form of brokerage fees on loans for buyers whom he knew were qualified based on false information submitted to lenders; Rashid received payment through 1st Regent and another company for originating mortgage loans for buyers whom he knew were not qualified; Dixon-Roper received payment for representing buyers and sellers at real estate closings, knowing that the buyers were not legitimately qualified borrowers; and Youssef received payment for processing loans through 1st Regent, knowing that she submitted false information to qualify buyers for the loans.

In addition, Rashid, Broughton, and Dixon-Roper allegedly obtained undisclosed payments through entities they controlled, including The Broughton Group, R&B Management, Hamaya Banco, and Dixon-Roper’s law firm. Rashid and Dixon also allegedly submitted false statements to lenders indicating that escrow money was being held by Dixon-Roper or her law firm. Instead, knowing that no escrow money was being held, Dixon directed the payment of money purportedly held in escrow to herself and Rashid, while concealing the true nature of the payments from lenders, the charges allege.

The government is being represented by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Stephanie Zimdahl and Erika Csicsila.

Each count of bank fraud carries a maximum penalty of 30 years in prison and a $1 million fine, and each count of mail fraud carries a maximum of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine, and restitution is mandatory. If convicted, the court may impose an alternate fine totaling twice the loss to any victim or twice the gain to the defendant, whichever is greater. The court must impose a reasonable sentence under federal sentencing statutes and the advisory United States Sentencing Guidelines.

The public is reminded that an indictment contains only charges and is not evidence of guilt. The defendants are presumed innocent and are entitled to a fair trial at which the government has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The charges are part of a continuing effort to investigate and prosecute mortgage fraud in northern Illinois and nationwide under the umbrella of the interagency Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force, which was established to lead an aggressive, coordinated, and proactive effort to investigate and prosecute financial crimes.

Since 2008, close to 200 defendants have been charged in federal court in Chicago and Rockford with engaging in various mortgage fraud schemes involving more than 1,000 properties and more than $280 million in potential losses, signifying the high priority that federal law enforcement officials give mortgage fraud in an effort to deter others from engaging in crimes relating to residential and commercial real estate.

The Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force includes representatives from a broad range of federal agencies, regulatory authorities, inspectors general, and state and local law enforcement who, working together, bring to bear a powerful array of criminal and civil enforcement resources. The task force is working to improve efforts across the federal executive branch, and with state and local partners, to investigate and prosecute significant financial crimes, ensure just and effective punishment for those who perpetrate financial crimes, combat discrimination in the lending and financial markets, and recover proceeds for victims of financial crimes. For more information on the task force, visit: http://www.stopfraud.gov.”

————————————————————–

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.


Prosecutors also have stake in Edwards’ trial verdict

May 22, 2012

Myrtle Beach Online on May 21, 2012 released the following:

“By Anne Blythe

GREENSBORO — John Edwards might be the one with the most to win or lose with the jury deliberating his fate, but the U.S. Department of Justice has a lot riding on his case, too.

When the eight men and four women return to the federal courthouse in downtown Greensboro Tuesday morning, they will begin their third day of deliberations in a case that also has put the Justice Department’s small public-integrity section under scrutiny.

Edwards’ trial came almost four years after the unit’s federal prosecutors bungled a corruption case against Ted Stevens, the U.S. senator from Alaska accused of failing to properly report more than $250,000 in gifts.

Stevens was convicted, , but the verdict was appealed and later vacated after it was revealed prosecutors and FBI agents had conspired to conceal and withhold evidence from the defense.

An investigation was launched into the integrity and professional practices of prosecutors in the public-integrity division. A scathing report from that investigation was released earlier this year, showing that prosecutors had “repeatedly ignored the law” and the ethical standards of their profession.

The Public Integrity Section was set up to root out corruption through the prosecution of elected and appointed public officials at all levels of government.

The section has exclusive jurisdiction over allegations of criminal misconduct on the part of federal judges and also supervises the nationwide investigation and prosecution of election crimes.

New chief for federal unit

Since the Stevens case, the unit has a new chief, former New York-based federal prosecutor Jack Smith. The Justice Department also has ordered training to make sure prosecutors disclose key evidence to defense attorneys.

Attorneys who have attended Edwards’ trial have commented throughout that the prosecution as well as the defense has a lot at stake in the case.

Edwards, a former two-time Democratic presidential candidate and U.S. senator who branched into politics after achieving success as a trial lawyer, was indicted last June on six counts related to violations of campaign-finance laws. The violations allegedly occured during Edwards’ campaign for the 2008 nomination, when two wealthy Edwards’ supporters gave more then $900,000 used to help hide Edwards’ extramarital affair with Rielle Hunter and her pregnancy.

Each of the six counts Edwards faces carries a penalty of up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine. However, Kieran Shanahan, a former federal prosecutor from Raleigh who sat through the trial, said Edwards – if convicted and unable to successfully appeal – would likely recieve a concurrent sentence and serve no more than five years.

Peter Henning, a law professor at Wayne State University in Detroit and co-author of “The Prosecution and Defense of Public Corruption,” said Monday that a not-guilty verdict would be “a black eye” for the justice department.

“It would call into question their decision even to pursue the case,” Henning added.

But he added that he had seen no surprises from the prosecution, and that ultimately the questions that arise from the trial might be those raised by rulings made outside the jury’s presence by Judge Catherine Eagles, who was appointed to the federal bench in 2010 by President Barack Obama.

Eagles prohibited a former Federal Election Commission chairman from offering his opinion to the jury on whether the money from billionaires Rachel “Bunny” Mellon and Fred Baron would typically be classified as a campaign contribution or gift. Scott Thomas, who had more than 30 years with the FEC, testified while the jury was out of the courtroom that he thought the money that went from Mellon and Baron to other people was used for personal expenses that did not need to be publicly reported or subject to campaign limits.

The jury, during its first two days of deliberations, has asked for many exhibits related to testimony about the $925,000 in checks issued by Mellon in 2007 and 2008.

Though only the 12 people on the jury know what is being discussed behind closed doors, the first two counts on the jury verdict sheet are related to the Mellon money.

Toward the end of the trial, the jurors sounded as if they were a collegial group, laughing and talking as they walked into and out of the jury box.

On Monday, the second day of deliberations, the jurors were quieter and somber-looking, barely looking at prosecutors or Edwards as they waited for the judge to answer questions or release them for lunch or the evening break.

As many await the verdict inside the federal courthouse in downtown Greensboro, national political organizations are seeking answers and raising questions outside the tense atmosphere.

Objections to judge’s instructions

On Monday, the Center for Competitive Politics, a conservative group that promotes the deregulation of U.S. elections, harshly criticized the final juror instructions issued last week in the trial, particularly sections about the definition of “influencing an election.”

“If Edwards goes to prison, we will have an Alice in Wonderland world where conduct that would not be punished by a civil fine can result in jail time,” Allison Hayward, vice president for policy of CCP, said in a prepared statement.

The organization’s spokeswoman pointed to a U.S. Supreme Court case decided in 1976, the landmark Buckley v. Valeo case, which states that under “due process” a person of ordinary intelligence must understand that his actions could be considered illegal.

“There is no legislative history to guide us in determining the scope of the critical phrase ‘for the purpose of … influencing,’ ” Hayward further stated.

“The Supreme Court said the phrase ‘for the purpose of influencing’ is so vague and broad that it cannot be constitutionally applied to define campaign spending.””

————————————————————–

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.


Roger Clemens trial: Prosecutors seek to authenticate physical evidence used against pitcher

May 22, 2012

The Washington Post on May 21, 2012 released the following:

“By Ann E. Marimow and Del Quentin Wilber

Federal prosecutors delved into the nitty gritty of the distribution, design and freshness of Miller Lite beer cans Monday as they sought to authenticate the physical evidence being used against star pitcher Roger Clemens in his perjury trial in the District’s federal courthouse.

A crushed beer can has played something of a leading role in the trial: Clemens’s former strength coach and chief accuser, Brian McNamee, used one to store needles, cotton balls and gauze he said he used to inject the baseball legend.

McNamee, who testified for a sixth and final day Monday, has said he recovered the can from Clemens’s recycling bin after injecting him with performance-enhancing drugs at his Manhattan apartment in 2001.

Displaying a chart that showed the evolution of the blue-and-gold Miller Lite can since the 1970s, government lawyers used the testimony of a beer company manager to try to back up McNamee’s assertion by putting a date on the can.

MillerCoors manager Anthony Manuele testified about the “freshness code” on the can in question and determined that it was filled in July 2001 at a North Carolina brewery and would have hit retail shelves in August.

On cross-examination, Clemens’s lawyer Rusty Hardin tried to raise doubt about McNamee’s story and pointed out that the company’s distribution map meant that the strength coach could have purchased the can in his home town of Breezy Point, N.Y.

Manuele’s testimony showed the lengths prosecutors have gone to try to authenticate evidence against Clemens, who is charged with perjury, making false statements and obstruction of Congress for denying to a House panel in 2008 that he had ever used performance-enhancing drugs. Congress was following up on a 2007 report by former senator George Mitchell that named dozens of ballplayers, including Clemens.

Government lawyers have already called a U.S. Postal Service employee to try to establish the likely date of a shipping receipt from steroid supplier Kirk Radomski to McNamee at Clemens’s Houston home.

The trial, now in its sixth week, again featured testimony from McNamee, who said Monday that he had supplied several big league ballplayers with performance-enhancing drugs and shared that information with law enforcement officials.

McNamee’s testimony regarding other ballplayers and performance-enhancing drugs was intended to suggest that he was not out to get Clemens when he began confiding in federal agents in 2007.

Defense attorneys for Clemens had opposed allowing McNamee to testify about the other players because of concerns about “guilt by association.” But U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton ruled that the government could introduce the information as a way to bolster McNamee’s credibility.

Last week, McNamee endured aggressive questioning by Hardin, Clemens’s lead attorney. He was forced to acknowledge that his story about injecting the baseball legend had evolved over time and that he had lied to federal agents and, separately, to police in a Florida criminal investigation.

But McNamee has largely remained unapologetic about his changing story. McNamee said Monday that he was loyal to Clemens and had no incentive to damage his employer’s reputation. The strength coach agreed to cooperate with federal agents, he said, to try to avoid getting in trouble for distributing the banned substances.

He told authorities about his involvement with several players, including pitchers Mike Stanton and Andy Pettitte and infielder Chuck Knoblauch. Earlier in the trial, Pettitte gave conflicting testimony about his memory of a conversation with Clemens about human growth hormone.

Before leaving the stand, McNamee said he regretted helping Clemens with performance-enhancing drugs. McNamee said he had become unemployable, ruined his marriage and his relationship with his children.

“I shouldn’t have gotten involved. I should have just educated and left it at that. I shouldn’t have enabled,” he said.

Prosecutors and defense attorneys also questioned a neighbor of Jose Canseco, Clemens’s former teammate. Alexander Lowrey was 11 years old at the time he attended a 1998 pool party at Canseco’s home, where he had his picture taken with Clemens.

McNamee alleges that Clemens and Canseco talked about performance-enhancing drugs at the party, but defense lawyers suggested that Clemens was playing golf during the time that McNamee attended.

Lowrey was questioned in an attempt to establish whether Clemens and McNamee could have been at the party together. Under cross-examination, Lowrey conceded to Hardin that he was uncertain of the date of the party or the exact times that he was there, raising questions about the timing of the conversation McNamee claimed to have observed.”

————————————————————–

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.


FBI Agents Search Robert Gentile’s Home in Connecticut

May 10, 2012

Fox News on May 10, 2012 released the following:

“Agents swarm reputed mobster’s home in Conn.

Associated Press

HARTFORD, Conn. – FBI agents on Thursday searched the property of a reputed Connecticut mobster who is suspected of withholding information about an infamous unsolved art heist in Boston.

Dozens of agents dug in the yard and removed boxes of evidence from the ranch-style Manchester home of 75-year-old Robert Gentile, who has been detained since February on federal drug and weapons charges.

A lawyer for Gentile, A. Ryan McGuigan, said the FBI was searching his client’s property for a second time because the agency had a new warrant allowing the use of ground-penetrating radar to look for buried weapons. McGuigan said he believes agents are really looking for stolen paintings but will find no such thing.

“This is nonsense,” McGuigan said. “This is the FBI. Are you trying to tell me they missed something the first time? They’re trying to find $500 million of stolen artwork. … All they’re going to find is night crawlers.”

A federal prosecutor said in March the FBI believes Gentile had some involvement with stolen property related to the 1990 heist at Boston’s Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, the largest art robbery in history. Thieves stole masterworks by Rembrandt, Vermeer, Degas and Manet worth more than a half-billion dollars.

McGuigan said Gentile doesn’t know anything about the art heist.

A U.S. attorney’s office spokesman declined to comment. A message left with an FBI spokesman was not immediately returned.

Gentile was arrested three months ago on a charge of selling illegally obtained prescription painkillers. Federal agents say they seized three revolvers, numerous rounds of ammunition and home-made silencers during a Feb. 10 search of Gentile’s home.

Gentile was arraigned last month on weapons charges. He leaned on a cane as he slowly rose before a judge in federal court in Hartford to plead not guilty to three charges.

McGuigan has said prosecutors were “piling on” with the gun charges.

Gentile was convicted of larceny in 1996. Convicted felons may not possess firearms or ammunition that have been transported across state lines or from overseas. Federal law also prohibits possession of a silencer unless it’s been registered.

Each of the three charges carries a maximum prison term of 10 years and a fine of up to $250,000.

Authorities say FBI agents have had unproductive discussions with Gentile about the art theft.”

————————————————————–

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.